text:
Municipality Duplek, which is part of the Podravska statistical region, measures 40 km2; this ranks it 146th among Slovene municipalities.
Statistical data for 2013 reveal the following:
In the middle of 2013 about 6,750 people (about 3,350 men and 3,400 women) were living in the municipality, which ranks Duplek 78th among Slovene municipalities. The population density was 169 people per square kilometre, which was higher than the national average of 102 people per square kilometre.
The number of live births was higher than the number of deaths, which means that natural increase per 1,000 population in the municipality was positive. It was 3.4 (in Slovenia 0.9). The number of people who moved from the municipality was higher than the number of people who moved into the municipality, so net migration per 1,000 population in the municipality was negative. It was -0.9. The sum of natural increase and net migration per 1,000 population in the municipality was positive. It was 2.5 (in Slovenia 1.1).
The mean age of people in Duplek was 41.3 years, which was lower than the national average (42.2).
As in most Slovene municipalities, in Duplek the number of old people was higher than the number of young people: there were 103 people, aged 65 or more, per 100 people aged 0–14. This ratio shows that the value of the ageing index was lower than the national average of 119. It also shows that the mean age of people in Duplek is growing more slowly than in Slovenia as a whole. Data by sex show that the ageing index for women was in all Slovene municipalities higher than the ageing index for men. In Duplek – as in most Slovene municipalities – more women were 65+ years old than 14 or less; for men the situation was exactly the opposite.
Duplek had 3 kindergarten. They were attended by 275 children or 79% of all children aged 1–5, which was more than the national average of 75%. In the school year 2013/2014 basic schools in Duplek were attended by about 470 pupils, while various upper secondary schools were attended by about 270 pupils. There were 40 students and 11 graduates per 1,000 people in the municipality; in Slovenia the averages were 44 per 1,000 and 9 per 1,000, respectively.
Among people aged 15–64 (i.e. working age population) about 56% were persons in employment (i.e. persons in paid employment or self-employed persons), which is less than the national average of 57%.
The registered unemployment rate was 14.1%, which is more than the national average (13.1%). As in most Slovene municipalities, more women than men were unemployed.
In Duplek, average monthly gross earnings per person employed by legal persons were about 19% lower than the annual average of monthly earnings for Slovenia; and net earnings about 16% lower.
In 2013, there were 381 dwellings per 1,000 population. About 72% of dwellings had at least three rooms. Average size of dwellings in the municipality was 90 m2.
About every other person in Duplek had a car (55 passenger cars per 100 population); cars in this municipality were on average 10 years old.
In 2013, 175 kg of municipal waste per person was collected in Duplek, which is 145 kg less than on average in Slovenia.


text:
More cables
Now I'm here--->
I did three repeats of the 16 row cable (Eunny's sock leg was four repeats. How on earth could I even think I could pull off only knitting three?) before I decided it was time to do something else. A heel for instance. After turning it I was however slightly surprised to see that the leg has shrunk quite a bit. Must be the heel pulling it down. I was a bit disappointed, but then I figured the only reason for a longer leg would be to show off those foxy cables, and there's still plenty of room for that. Sock leg length has a saturation point, a trade-off between the need for warmth and the reluctance of continuing to knit the same thing you've been knitting for days now. My back is aching/ from all sock-making.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Phone number: 0403 81....
Email: Click to view
URL: http://www.gregchandlersigns.com.au
Business Info
Greg Chandler Signs specializes in traditional hand-painted signage, but we also cut vinyl graphics and lettering. We offer prompt reliable service, only use quality materials and have a reputation for inventive and eye-catching design ideas. Take a look at the gallery on our website to see some of our past work.
Recommend This Business
The review system is a way for customers of this business to easily share their opinion. By sharing your experience with this business, you help other consumers find the right business for them! By leaving a review, you also earn STARPOINTS. Starpoints can be redeemed for cash or prizes like iTunes giftcards. Find out more about Starpoints here.
Some tips when posting a review: When writing a review, see if you can be as balanced as possible. What did you like, what didn't you like? Here are some things to think about - How was the customer service? How was the product or service quality? How was the price/value? Please also check and adhere to the editorial guidelines when posting a review.
Add your own review
Full Category Tree
Nearby Suburbs
- Echuca South (1) - 1.32 km


text:
At Nurture Chiropractic we realise everybody has individual needs. We use a broad range of low force techniques that we can adapt if required to your personal requirements. Everyone deserves care. We have many tools to help you feel comfortable and relaxed during your visit.
Some of the most common techniques we use include:
Sacro-Occipital Technique (SOT)
Neuro Emotional Technique (NET)
Applied Kinesiology (AK)
Extremity adjusting
Sacro Occipital Technic (SOT) is a comprehensive, gentle and innovative technique of Chiropractic. It is so named because of the relationship between the Sacrum (base of the spine) and the Occiput (base of the skull).
One of the functions of the sacrum is to pump Cerebro-Spinal Fluid (CSF) from the base of the spine back up the spinal canal to the brain and throughout the nervous system. CSF acts as the circulatory system of the brain and spinal cord.
The pelvis forms the foundational support of the human skeleton. It supports the upper body right up to the skull, and enables us to transfer our weight to our legs. The spine holds our body upright, supports all of our organs and provides anchor points for our muscles. It also protects our nervous system. The nervous system controls our body, and can only function normally when free of interference.
NET is a mind-body technique that uses a methodology of finding and removing neurological imbalances related to the physiology of unresolved stress. It is important to note that NET does not cure or heal the patient, but rather, NET assists in removing blocks to the natural vitalism of the body, "allowing" the body better able to repair itself naturally.


text:
Andrew Wolson (above left) presented one of the most interesting Creator Projects that we saw at One Spark. Andrew's project, "Skateboard wheel printer," is still in its infancy, as far a becoming an actual product. However, Andrew told us that he has had the idea in the back of his mind for 3+ years. Andrew told us that the original idea for the wheel came while he was designing labeling or packaging – I can't recall which – for a skateboard company during his time at SCAD. He wanted to apply the approach of skateboarding to the design of skateboard wheels.
Skateboarding is very much about approaching and viewing everyday objects and locals from a different, unique perspective: skateboarders ollie down stairs, instead of walking; grind handrails instead of holding on, and so forth. Andrew wanted to apply that same concept – the alternate approach to objects – to the skateboard wheel. Andrew's skateboard wheel printer does just that.
Andrew's wheel is incredibly unique, as you can see above. Stated quite simply, "This is a skateboard wheel that when rolled across the ground with leave and impression on the ground."1 The cast for the wheel is 3D printed, and can be customized as much as the small surface area will allow. Once the cast is made, the wheels will be made with the traditional polyurethane. Inside each wheel, however, is an inkwell as you can see in the cutaway on the right in the above image. Here is an exaple of the kind of impression the wheel will leave on the ground:
Andrew explained the concept to us in much greater detail when we stopped by his booth during One Spark. The prototype is so new that Andrew has yet to get a website up and running for the skateboard wheel, but you can check out his personal website, or say hello on Google+:


text:
Power Play: Book and Movie Discussions:
When a girl values her own leadership style and can challenge cultural norms that isolate her, she has greater potential to access opportunity. To explore this power, pick out a book or movie from the power play category. Find prompting questions below to answer after you've finished one of the books or movies.
Power Play: When a girl understands and has the power of deciphering unwritten codes of dominant culture, she can:
- Define leadership for herself
- Navigate and challenge cultural norms and obstacles to access opportunity
- Speak confidently in public
- Negotiate for something she wants in the dominant culture
1. Reflecting on the list above, and using passages from the book or movie, where do you see the main character using the power to navigate dominant culture?
2. Reflecting on the list above, and using passages from the book or movie, where do you see the main character lacking power in the dominant culture?
3. During the course of the book or movie, how does the main character grow or change as a result of decoding culture and navigating norms where she feels excluded? Can she change these norms?
4. In your life, what are ways you decode dominant culture and show leadership in a way that you are comfortable with? How do you challenge or try to change cultural norms when you feel excluded?
5. What is one of the skills from the list above that you want to work on with a friend or mentor?


text:
What Happened on 17 December 2012
Japan's Shinzo Abe and his conservative Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) secured a landslide victory in Sunday's elections. The LDP won… Read More.
U.S. President Barack Obama has urged for stronger gun control in the wake of Friday's shootings at a school in… Read More.
Barclays said on Sunday that U.S. regulators' proposed fines of $470 million for the bank's alleged manipulation of energy markets… Read More.
Sergio Garcia won his second title of 2012 on Sunday with a spectacular final round at the Johor Open in… Read More.
Twitter has launched the long-promised feature enabling users to download their entire post history. Users on Sunday began reporting that… Read More.
The American premiere of the Tom Cruise action flick Jack Reacher has been postponed following the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut… Read More.


text:
Sometimes rising health care costs outside of the USA are influenced by rates inside the USA. Here is some information on this matter gleaned from the Wall Street Journal on March 12, 2001: After a period of moderate increases a study by the Health Care Financing Administration found that spending on health care is rising fast. Spending rose 8.3 percent in 2000 and is expected to grow 8.6 percent this year. By comparison, it rose 5.6 percent in 1999. In 1999 spending on prescription drugs jumped 17 percent. During the next four years drug costs are expected to rise about 15 percent annually.
Joe Manning, a correspondent for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, on Sept. 25, 2000, adds to the above by listing specific reasons for the increases as follows: Prescription drugs are being promoted with mass marketing; people are also going to the doctor more, often unnecessarily; diagnostic tests such as magnetic resonance imaging scans (MRIS) are being used more routinely; people are demanding more health care; an aging population demanding access to expensive new technologies and medicines; and premiums have been held down artificially.
It may not sound reasonable, but international insurance rates are influenced by domestic rates in the USA. Also, many Americans who work overseas still get most of their medical work done in the USA while they are on furlough.
We work on keeping all information on this site relevant, and free from error.
The information and advice on this website was deemed accurate when it was originally published. GNI cannot accept any responsibility or liability for any actions taken on the basis of the information provided, unless that information is subsequently confirmed in writing. For the latest up-to-date information please call us or check brochures and other published materials for latest revision/date.


text:
Cacao Vs. Cocoa: Know the Basic Differences
The words cacao and cocoa are often used interchangeably. However, are both these words names for the same thing? In this article, we shall look at the differences between cocoa and cacao, in respect to their preparation, nutritional qualities, taste, and other characteristics.
Anuj Mudaliar
Did You Know?Chocolate! This one word is enough to make mouths water for millions of people across the globe. However, not everyone is familiar with where this heavenly food comes from. Originating from the ancient Mayan culture, where cacao beans were used in a bitter-tasting brew, these seeds have now become an integral part of world cuisine, especially for desserts and sweet drinks.
The ancient Mayans used cacao beans not only as a food source, but also as a form of currency, used in day-to-day transactions. In the modern world, this would mean that all cacao plantation owners would be millionaires and billionaires!
The ancient Mayans used cacao beans not only as a food source, but also as a form of currency, used in day-to-day transactions. In the modern world, this would mean that all cacao plantation owners would be millionaires and billionaires!
If you visit a supermarket, there is a good chance that you will see products labeled as both cacao and cocoa. These items usually look very similar too. However, despite their many similarities, and despite the fact that both of them are products of cacao seeds, there are significant differences between the two, depending on how they are prepared. Let's check out a cacao vs. cocoa comparison for a better understanding.
Cacao Vs. Cocoa
Where Do Cacao Trees Grow?Well, both cocoa and cacao come from the same tree. And cacao plantations exist all over the world. However, the best of the produce is only found in areas that have specific climatic conditions for cocoa trees to grow in. The region should have an average temperature of 20 - 30°C (68 - 86°F), at least 1,500 mm of rainfall every year, an average of 70 - 95% humidity, and a good amount of shade.
The biggest producers of cocoa/cacao are found around central America, western Africa, and some parts of southeast Asia. Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Fiji, Ghana, Haiti, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Madagascar, New Guinea, Panama, Samoa, Sri Lanka, Trinidad, and Venezuela are among the top producers of cocoa/cacao.
Manufacturing ProcessCacao: The major difference between cocoa and cacao is the amount of processing that the seeds undergo. Raw cacao is created by harvesting, fermenting, drying, and cleaning raw cacao beans, after which point they may be broken down into cacao nibs or ground into cacao powder.
Cocoa: To create cocoa, cacao beans are roasted after the fermenting process. Additives such as sugar and cocoa butter might be added to the powder. Sometimes, the cocoa powder is further processed along with an alkaline solution, which gets rid of the naturally acidic taste of cacao beans, giving them a deeper flavor that is almost like chocolate. This cocoa is called dutched cocoa.
Nutritional ValuesCacao: 1 tablespoon of cacao powder has around 12 - 15 calories, 1 gram of fat, and around 2 grams of dietary fiber. Cacao usually contains tiny amounts of minerals and vitamins, such as iron, magnesium, phosphorus, some types of vitamin B, folate, vitamin E, and vitamin K. Its caffeine content is also low, at around 12 mg. Cacao contains an extremely large amount of antioxidants, with an ORAC (oxygen radical absorbent capacity) value of around 95,000. It is important to note that cacao is rarely eaten by itself. It is mixed with fruits or smoothies, which provide extra nutrients to it.
Cocoa: Cocoa has similar nutritional values to cacao. However, the roasting process can drastically reduce the amount of antioxidants, vitamins, and trace minerals. This can be seen as the ORAC value of cocoa is approximately 26,000. Besides this, the addition of sugar, cocoa butter, and sugar affects the calorie and fat count in cocoa products.
TasteWhat does cacao taste like: Cocoa has a mildly bitter taste, which is unpalatable to most chocolate lovers. This makes it a favorite for making cakes and other forms of patisserie, which need a chocolate color, but with a bitter touch.
What does cocoa taste like: Roasted or dutched cocoa gets rid of the bitter taste, and gives it a deeper and smoother tone. The addition of sugar and cocoa butter can bring the flavor very close to that of chocolate.
Nutritional BenefitsHealth benefits of cacao: Cacao has numerous benefits besides slowing down radical oxidants. The unprocessed form helps reduce resistance to insulin, making it very useful for diabetics. It also protects the nerves from damage, reducing the chances of strokes, heart attacks, and abnormal blood pressure, by lowering cholesterol. It is also proven to stop free radicals which can cause cancer, and it also helps relieve stress by the release of neurotransmitter hormones that increase the sense of well-being in a person.
Health benefits of cocoa: Cocoa has the same benefits as cacao. It can also reduce the chances of blood clots. However, due to the loss of nutrients and antioxidants, the benefits of consuming cocoa are muted to a large extent. While both cacao and cocoa are beneficial for the body, they also have some drawbacks.
Side EffectsThe side effects mentioned hereon have not been clearly substantiated, although there are indications to support them. So, it is important to consult a dietitian when you want to follow a particular diet.
Side effects of cacao: Cacao has been blamed for addiction, disturbed sleep cycles, damaged kidneys, mood swings, and build-up of toxicity in the blood and liver. It is also said to act as a hallucinogen when consumed in large quantities.
Side effects of cocoa: Apart from the side effects of cacao, cocoa is also sometimes blamed for raising blood sugar levels, causing diarrhea, triggering allergies and migraines in sensitive people, and for causing GERD (Gastroeasophagal Reflux Disease).
When comparing raw cacao vs. cocoa powder, it is important to note that cacao is not actually raw. The drying of cacao beans in sunlight, pressurized removal of cocoa butter, and grinding into nibs and powder, generates a lot of heat which changes the molecular structure of raw cacao. When you find products which claim to be cold pressed, or other methods of creating cacao nibs or powder without heat, it is most probably a scam/publicity stunt. It is always better to take an informed decision, and the above information will help you enjoy the cacao bean in all its glory, in the best way.


text:
This is a great opportunity to help one of our favorite charities, March of Dimes. With each purchase of a Green Bean Bracelet, a donation will be made to the March of Dimes. The bracelets are being sold for $5 each and 100 percent of the proceeds will be donated in honor of Heidi, Lily, Paige, and Rylan.
The support that we continue to get amazes me and helps me each day. I love that the memory of my babies can live on, and that they have touched so many people's hearts.
Click the 'Buy Now' button above to order your bracelets. Remember, all of the proceeds will go to the March of Dimes. Thank you from the bottom of my heart!


text:
New $560M Giti Tire mega-plant could 'reshape Chester Co.'s economic future'
South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster praised the new $560 million Giti Tire mega-plant in Richburg as a "game changer" for Chester County, and predicted the company would help attract thousands more jobs to the area.
McMaster said the plant, which will begin production this year, proved South Carolina to be a "handshake state" that gets deals done quickly and decisively.
"We're on top of the world and we need to keep on going," said McMaster, who toured the 1.6 million-square-foot complex for nearly two hours Wednesday morning. "The best is yet to come."
Invited guests or speakers included Walmart CEO and president Greg Foran, S.C. Sen. Mike Fanning, S.C. Rep. Bruce Bryant and McMaster's wife Peggy.
The plant — Giti Tire's first North American manufacturing facility and its ninth worldwide — currently employs 200 workers. Officials expect to double that number by the end of the year. Hank Eisenga, Giti's vice president of manufacturing, said the Richburg facility hopes to employ at least 1,000 workers by the end of 2018.
It's taken a long time to get to production, Eisenga said. Giti Tire USA has spent at least three years building and fitting the massive site near the Interstate 77 interchange at S.C. 9.
SC Gov. @henrymcmaster now touring around part of the 1.6 million square foot Giti Tire facility in Chester County. This place is massive. pic.twitter.com/vsQHlzNnI8— David Thackham (@DThackham) October 4, 2017
Initial production is expected to total around 5 million tires per year or 30,000 per day. Sales will begin next spring.
Much of the early production will be focused on two types of Dextero-brand tires, which will be available at Walmart stores and on Walmart.com. The company also will provide Giti tires for the 2019 Volkswagen Passat in the near future.
Surrounded by at least 150 new Giti workers, decked in black or blue polo shirts emblazoned with the company logo, Armand Allaire, the vice president of sales, said excitement was in the air.
"You are smelling excitement," said Allaire, addressing a crowd of lawmakers, guests and media. "We will not bottle this essence, but we will generate it daily."
The Giti tires are going through a visual inspection now. pic.twitter.com/x2gfCC6eaB— David Thackham (@DThackham) October 4, 2017
Giti Tire officials say they hope to hire up to 1,700 workers over the next decade. If sales are high, they say they have the ability to expand further on their roughly 1,500-acre campus.
Executive chairman Enki Tan projects employing as many as 5,000 workers. Tan said he is passionate about working hand-in-hand with local school districts and technical colleges to recruit and train highly-skilled employees for demanding and highly-automated labor.
Eisenga said it's not immediately clear what pay ranges those jobs could offer.
Having access to the Port of Charleston, the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport and an available workforce in Chester County was key to bringing Giti to the area, Tan said.
"It is truly a momentous occasion for Giti Tire, for South Carolina and for Chester County," Tan said.
Foran said the move "goes a long way" to bolstering Walmart's "Made In America" campaign. According to Walmart, the company is investing $250 billion in products that support American jobs.
The Boston Consulting Group, a firm that helps businesses be more efficient, predicts Walmart's initiative could create around 250,000 manufacturing jobs.
Foran said McMaster told him South Carolina's future is so bright, he would have to keep his solar eclipse glasses from the nationwide event earlier this summer. For good measure, Foran said he brought a pair of Walmart-brand eclipse glasses to give to McMaster.
"I'm thrilled to be a part of this," Foran said. "I couldn't be prouder."
McMaster said he saw the Giti-Walmart connection as a happy marriage. "I wish we could do something like this for every county," he said.
Just arrived at Chester County's @gititire plant for their media tour. SC Gov. @henrymcmaster will be here, among many other dignitaries pic.twitter.com/igVevOpERO— David Thackham (@DThackham) October 4, 2017
Chester County Supervisor Shane Stuart agrees.
He called Giti Tire "Chester County's BMW," referring to the massive German automotive manufacturing plant which employs around 9,000 workers in Spartanburg.
"This will help reshape Chester County's economic future," Stuart said.
David Thackham: 803-329-4066, @dthackham


text:
Marjorie Moskowitz, "Drivebye," 2017
John Galan "Sabores de mi tierra"
"The Brush found my fingertips before I can remember anything else. Every time I paint, I am discovering a new part of me, an extension of myself which I can share with the world." – John Galan
The collection of works displayed at 643 Project Space by John Galan, are from a body of work titled "Sabores de mi tierra (The flavors of my land)," which he feels depicts the past, present, and future. These paintings and plein-air work represent the lands and cultures that Galan has experienced over the past two years. Some depict the California landscape, while other paintings were created while traveling abroad in New York, Vermont, and Portugal, as an Artist in Residence. Galan writes, "the one true virtue I have learned from travelling to a new place is that natural beauty can be found wherever you go, but what makes a place more beautiful is its people and their ability to reflect that beauty outwards in all they do; from their culture, to their beliefs, and much more. It is simply what make us human." The title of the show, "Sabores de mi tierra," comes from his personal journey experiencing worldly beauty, cultural unity, and the intimate experience of connecting with the Land (Earth). Working with vibrant, high-chroma hues that are influenced by the artist's Mexican heritage, Galan's paintings depict personal memories and ideas, themes and motifs influenced by geographical location, seasonal changes, weather phenomena, personality and culture. John Galan resides in Ventura County, California.
Please join John Galan Friday, March 3, 6:30-9:30pm, for his opening reception at 643 Project Space.
Gallery hours are by appointment only. Please contact the artist @ (818) 808-8808 or email at email@example.com
GALLERY HOURS: 12 - 3PM on Feb. 4, Feb. 11 and Feb. 18, otherwise contact Julia at firstname.lastname@example.com
"Ephemera OS"
Julia Pinkham's work are created "Ala Prima" on wide, heavyweight paper. She works with paper either rolled out on the floor or pinned onto the walls of her studio. She works with acrylic paints, pens and pencils, often using brushes attached to long handles in order to further free up the painting process. Although she regularly uses sketchbooks to review and sketch out ideas before she starts a new painting, she mostly relies on creating works deliberately done without a preconceived plan. Instead, she prefers to freely apply the paint and follow her instincts as she works. Julia says that, "the blank wallpaper base is wonderful in the way it immediately absorbs the paint and keeps the brush strokes fresh. I can't go back and fuss over the marks I make." Working with giant rolls of yards and yards of 54" paper, she can simply roll up her paintings as she goes along. Julia says that this process, "allows me to be in the moment and work without concern for results, or the temporary nature of paper however oversized it may be. Julia has been self-employed as an artist since 1979. Her work has been strongly influenced by her fascination with the natural world and organic forms. Her current series of gestural abstract paintings, done with mixed media and acrylic on both canvas and paper, reflect her ongoing interest in both the Surrealist's "automatic painting" and the Abstract Expressionist movements in American Art. Please join Julia Friday, February 3, 5-8:00pm, for her opening reception at 643 Project Space.


text:
What is feedback?Generally speaking, feedback is how games communicate with you. You speak to the game with input, it responds with feedback.
Feedback in the real world
It's all about feedback.
Let's look at some examples of feedback in the real world:
- The light on your toaster that tells you it's cooking
- The illuminated elevator button that assures you an elevator is on its way
- The speedometer that tells you how fast you're driving
The power of good feedback is that it simplifies and communicates important information.
Perhaps you can see that your toast is cooking, hear the elevator coming and have an uncanny ability to judge the speed of a travelling car. That's cool, but with good feedback, you don't need to! More importantly, people who don't have your amazing skills can still use toasters, elevators and cars safely - greatly expanding the accessibility of the design.
Good feedback condenses the incredibly complicated workings of modern aeroplanes, power plants and other large scale technologies down to a manageable stream of information.
Feedback in Game DesignSo, we're back to game design. As discussed above, we could consider anything the game outputs (audio, visual, rumble etc) to be feedback. Instead of getting all precious about that, let's focus on conveying specific, gameplay relevant, information to the player.
Some examples of feedback in games:
- The sound of collecting a 1up in Mario
- The psychedelic colour cycling and looping music of Mariokart's Star
- The blood and veins that increasingly obscure your vision in most modern shooters
Let's explore these three examples, looking first at the feedback itself and what it implies:
- 1up jingle in Mario -Your lives count has gone up by one!
This feedback indicates that an instantaneous change has just taken place. This feedback is so distinctive it doesn't faze players when 1ups are awarded for other tasks such as collecting 100 coins, or killing a bunch of enemies in succession.
- Star powerup's music and psychedelia - You're freaking dangerous to everyone!
This feedback indicates your state has changed. The feedback ensures you know the effect is still active (and alerts nearby suckers!) When the effects stop, you know the powerup has worn off.
- Blood and veins all over my goggles! - You've sustained damage!
This feedback indicates that an analogue value (your health) has changed significantly. The intensity of the effect indicates the severity of the damage, reinforced by its gradual disappearance as you return to "healthy."
Missing FeedbackSo, without the feedback above, how would you know you were getting 1ups, that your Star powerup was still active or that you were one shot away from death? You wouldn't. Players quickly become confused about how to earn 1ups, why Toad knocked them off the track and whether they'll survive another fire fight.
Missing feedback is a common pitfall for new designers, as is confusion among those who play their games. New designers tend to hand-hold friends through their games, verbally explaining what that enemy does and what that button just did - compensating for the lack of clear feedback.
With that in mind, let's look at an example!
Example: A Button!I've created this button just for you. Give it a click.
Unsatisfying, right? You may be wondering any of the following... Did that button work? Did I push it for long enough? Did my mouse button fail? Is it just a picture of a button?
All these questions are completely legitimate - especially as it's only a picture of a button - you just clicked on a picture of a button! Okay, let's fix it. First, let's identify the problems our button has:
- Players don't know if their input was successful.
- Players don't know how long to hold the button for (if at all).
- Players don't know if the button does anything.
Players don't know if their input was successfulTry pressing now.
Now when you press the button, you see it visually depress. It makes a huge difference to know that you definitely pressed it – you saw it change! Now you're only left wondering what it did.
For good measure, the button also makes a noise when pressed. Now you can press it with your eyes closed too. We could have implemented either audio or visual feedback, but having both is doubly reassuring.
At this point, I'd also like to draw your attention to the sound your mouse button makes when you click it. Click it a few times. Now a long click. Mmmm, clicky. It's no coincidence that every mouse in the last 20 years has made that exact same noise. Good feedback.
Players don't know how long to hold the button forLet's have the button light up as soon as it's pressed, rather like an elevator call button. For the example, we'll have it turn off again a second later. This illustrates that the button in instantaneous and additional hold time is pointless.
Most buttons don't require you to hold them for any specific period of time, but we can probably build some examples...
This first example shows you just how long you need to hold it before anything meaningful will happen. You'll notice this still doesn't address the question of what the button does, just makes for a silly looking button. It's also worth noticing that the player is receiving feedback that they're input is being received, as well as feedback that they need to hold for longer.
This button shows that it's only doing something while you have it depressed
Players don't know if the button does anythingIt's important for players to see what buttons do. Often proximity helps (the door is right there) or an assisted line of sight where they see the result or even an adjacent security screen showing what has just been affected.
In reality, all the buttons on this page are feeding your clicks back to an evil research station where you're blasting sad puppies with cold water. SCIENCE! Including a webcam feed of the soggy pups beside the buttons would give you more clear feedback - and a much better idea what atrocities you were committing - but my budget doesn't allow for it. You'll just have to take my word for it.
ConclusionWell, we've only scratched the surface on feedback here, but hopefully you agree that it's absolutely crucial to good game design. In the coming days, keep an eye out for good feedback in the games you play and in the world around you. Really look at what the feedback is, and what its message is. What feedback surprises you? Share it with us below!
Next time I'll be going into a little more depth on feedback; looking at specifically what roles it performs.


text:
Understanding Sea Level Rise
PLEASE NOTE: This is an unedited transcript. All SciLine briefings are on the record and reporters are free to quote from them. Please refer to the video (above) to confirm exact quotes.
Rick Weiss: Hello, everybody. Welcome to our media briefing on understanding sea level rise and the modeling of sea level rise. I want to just give a quick moment to introduce you to SciLine so you know who's bringing you this media briefing today. SciLine was just last fall. It's an editorial independent operation located at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. It's funded completely by philanthropies. And the soul goal of this operation is to help reporters who are covering stories on environment, health, and science.
And we do that in response in part to a trend that I think everyone's familiar with in journalism today, which is that newsrooms are shrinking. Specialty reporters are shrinking as a core. More and more science stories, and health and environment stories, are being done by reporters, like many of you online today, who cover big beats, who are not necessarily specialists, and who could use some help getting the evidence and the expert sources that you know can be so important to make your stories better. Especially given the increasing deadline pressures that everybody's under today doing sometimes two or three stories a day instead of just one.
So, our goal is to get more evidence into news stories and to help you do that. One of the ways we do it is to provide a matching service where, if you're working on a story, you can get in touch with us, tell us what kind of expert you need. We have a huge database of scientists who are very good in their fields and good communicators. And we have a concierge service of sorts that will hook you up with the expert you need to help you get more evidence into your story. We also do news briefings like this. We've got fact sheets that we're starting to populate our website with and some other services. So, you can check out our website at www.sciline.org and learn more about what we're up to.
The issue of sea level rise and the modeling that goes into trying to understand sea level rise is the perfect kind of a topic for what we're seeking to do here. It's one of those things that seems to be of great potential consequence. But it's also an area of a lot of confusion. So, we'd like to try to clear that up since it's important and confusing. I think we've all heard that sea levels are rising, and we've all heard that climate change seems to be one of the, if not the major reason that sea levels are rising.
But I know for myself that the details about that can be confusing and it's hard to know what to make of it. We hear stories about millimeters per year which, frankly, doesn't sound like that big a deal compared to the size of ripples washing up on the shore, and the waves, and the tides. But I also have read that if Greenland were to melt, that's 20 feet of sea level rise. And it seems like things are melting fast. And Antarctica's a lot bigger than Greenland. So, what to make of all that?
I know I'm mixing some frozen apples and thawed oranges here. But the basic idea is we ought to get straight as reporters how to talk about this. And not make the mistake of feeding into climate denial. Or making the mistake of feeding into being what some people have come to call climate bullies. Or maybe feeding into the worse crime of all, I think, which is this namby-pamby false equivalence that comes off a lot where equal space is given to people with weak science. So, to help unpack all this and to make sure that you all can write clearly and accurately about this topic and inform the public and decision makers about what the facts are, and what we know and what we don't know and how we know it, we have four experts today with great credentials who are going to explain this to us.
I'm not going to go through the full bios with you right now because they're all available on the web landing page that you folks have seen. But I'll just give you the batting order, and that is that you'll first hear from Michael Oppenheimer of Princeton who will give an overview of what we know today about sea level rise and about the models that scientists use to understand what's happening. Because it never hurts to have the basics spelled out authoritatively. Next, you'll hear from Andrea Dutton from the University of Florida who will take us back in time to talk about the paleo climate and how studies of climate and sea levels in the distant past can inform and allow us to calibrate our models and predictions today.
Sophie Nowicki of NASA Goddard will tell us what's happening with the world's major ice sheets today and how all that feeds into the modeling and prediction process that we've been talking about. And finally, Ben Strauss of Climate Central will tie all this together miraculously to help paint the picture of take-homes that you want to have, including maybe literally the take-homes. Like, what's going to be happening to some of our homes and hometowns in the years to come and what to make of all that. So with that, let me just turn it over to Michael to get things started. Thanks again for joining us.
Michael Oppenheimer: Good morning, everyone. I'm going to give you some general points about sea level rise and its consequences. And then let my colleagues give you the detail. Sea level rose about six inches during the 20th century, mostly due to anthropogenic climate change. We know this from flotation devices near the coast called tide gauges, as well as global-scale satellite altimetry measurements.
We also know that over the preceding centuries long-term ups and downs of sea level generally followed changes in global average temperature. And Andrea will talk about that a little later. Six inches might not sound like a lot but it's enough to permanently narrow the typical east coast beach by about 50 feet through erosion and submergence. Recently, the rate of rise has accelerated from about six inches per century to about double that, more than an inch every decade, a foot per century.
We know why global sea level rises. Due to the way warming effects ocean water and ice. First, ocean water, like most fluids, expands when it's heated. Second, mountain glaciers melt when warm. Third, the large ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica melt and disintegrate into the ocean with warmth, either with warming from above from the atmosphere or warming from a warmer ocean below. Currently these three sources - expansion of sea water, melting glaciers, and disintegrating ice sheets - contribute about equally to sea level rise.
In the future, we expect the ice sheet contribution to become the largest factor. And that's a great concern because just the vulnerable parts of Antarctica and the Greenland ice sheet contain 40 feet worth of sea level rise. The harder part is projecting sea level rise into the future due to uncertainties in our understanding, especially with respect to modeling of the two ice sheets. And Sophie will have a few things to say about that later.
But we are certain that additional sea level rise is baked into the system regardless of future greenhouse gas emissions because of various lags in the system. The time it takes for emissions changes has significantly slowed warming. The time for heat to penetrate deep into the ocean waters. The time for ice to warm and melt. Stabilizing sea level would take centuries under even optimistic emission scenarios. So, emissions reductions, even rapid ones, as envisioned under for instance the two-degree global target, don't make a very big difference to sea level until after mid-century. But for subsequent decades, the sea level rise difference between low emissions and high emissions scenarios becomes very large.
IPCC's Fifth Assessment said that by 2050 global average sea level could rise by more than a foot compared to what it was in year 2000. By 2100 these numbers increase to as much as three feet. Some recent literature published since the Fifth Assessment Report foresees an even faster and larger rise. New projections will be forthcoming in September 2019 with the release of IPCC's Special Report on oceans, cryosphere, and climate change. In addition to submergence and erosion the effect of sea level rise is felt most notably during the surge that accompanies coastal storms, like hurricane or nor'easters, and also during high tide. Sea level rise means that even if storms don't strengthen with warming the surge will push water further inland than previously, causing much more extensive flooding.
For example, by 2050, floods that now occur once every 50 years in first, let's say, Charleston, South Carolina, could occur more than once every three years. More than a factor can increase in the frequency. For New York City in year 2100, floods that now occur once per century - which in the past have shut down the city - could occur almost once every other month. Hurricane Sandy, that caused significant additional damage up and down the northeast coast. And it would have had it arrived a century earlier, even if the city looked the same because it was riding on a higher sea level. And I think Ben will have some things to say about that later.
Tidal or nuisance flooding, as it's sometimes called, which is less damaging - translate that as flooded basements rather than running to the nearest shelter - but which occur much more frequently than the large storms have also increased markedly. Areas like the Carolinas that formerly experience such flooding only a few days a year now experience it up to 40 days a year. And Ben can also comment on estimates for the future.
I'll close by reminding everyone that our history of defending infrastructure and people against coastal flooding is not particularly encouraging. We're always playing catchup fighting the last flood. In the meantime, sea level rise and the flood heights are only going to increase in the future - for the foreseeable future. This is a battle that we are currently losing. Thank you.
Rick Weiss: Thank you, Michael, for that inspiring ending. I think actually potentially truly inspiring. Its good to know that something needs to get done, if it does. Let's move on to Andrea and take a look back in time and see how that contributes to the issue.
Andrea Dutton: Okay. Thanks. So, I'm a geologist and I study past sea level so I often get asked the question of how looking at past sea level has really any relevance to the conversation that we're having here today about what's going to happen to sea level in the future. So, today I'm going to answer that question for you. And I'm going to share two different stories with you. The first is about what we have learned about future sea level rise by looking into the deep past. And the second story is about some work that I have gotten involved with more recently looking at sea level rise over the past century using records from tide gauges.
So, first I'm going to tell you what we've learned about sea level rise by looking at past warm periods in Earth's history. And as Michael mentioned earlier, one of our largest uncertainties is how these large polar ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are going to respond when we're thinking about suggesting changes in sea level in the future. So, to answer that question one thing we can do is look into the past because to some extent the earth has done some of these experiments for us. It has been warmer before. Those polar ice sheets have retreated. And so, we can look to those examples to see how much they retreated under warming and how quickly that happened. When we're modeling into the future, one of the challenges we have is we've never been around to observe that particular process before. And so, we don't have a full understanding of the physics involved in that ice sheet retreat. And that's why we need to go into the past to put some constraints on that.
So, I'm going to talk about a period of time about 125,000 years ago. And so, this is before the last ice age. So, in the last Ice Age we had large ice sheets advance over, for example, North America. Sea levels dropped because a lot of that water was tied up in the ice sheets. And before that there was another warm period we call the last interglacial. And the best estimates we have right now of what the global average sea level was during this time period is about six to nine meters higher. So, that's about 20 to 30 feet higher than today. The reason that finding is really important is that the global average temperature at its warmest during that time period was about the same as the global average temperature today, although the poles were a few degrees warmer. But those are temperatures that we are destined to reach in the poles in a matter of a couple of decades.
So, why is this important? It means that if you had that much warming during that past time period, we saw a significant retreat of ice from Greenland and Antarctica. We can, of course, get some sea level rise by melting the rest of the mountain glaciers and also as water warms it expands. Those two factors, though, can only give us about one meter of sea level rise. We know that the Greenland ice sheet retreated partially during that time period, contributing maybe something about two meters above of average sea level rise around the globe. So, to get up to six to nine meters, or that 20 to 30 feet level, we really would have had to tap into the Antarctic ice sheet. And that's something that you may have read about a lot in the news. In fact, people are concerned about what's going to happen, particularly in the west Antarctic ice sheet which is thought to be most vulnerable. Because a large section of that ice sheet is based below sea level, so it's susceptible to this ocean warming that Michael talked about before and it could retreat very rapidly because of the physics involved there.
So, okay. That happened during that one time period. So, was that a fluke? Or is that a repeated experiment? So, we've looked at several at several past warm periods over the last three million years and we saw repeatedly that sea levels rose by at least 20 feet with anywhere from one to three degrees Celsius of warming where each degree Celsius is about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit. So, that's a 1.8 to about 5.5 degrees Fahrenheit. So, that's the repeated experiment that we see over and over again. Now, the good news about this is that that type of sea level rise is not going to happen overnight. We're not going to wake up tomorrow to dramatic flooding. Right? As mentioned before, it takes some time for that ice to heat up and to respond to that. So, I often talk to people about kind of like throwing an ice cube into a warm room and watching it melt. And you can think of these polar ice sheets as if we've thrown them into a warm and now we're sitting back and watching what's happened and how quickly they're going to melt. That is one of the remaining big questions to answer though. How quickly will this process unfold? And that is a very active area of research. One, in fact, that my own research group is focused on at the moment.
We do know something about the volumes of ice involved though. So, the west Antarctic ice sheet, I mentioned before, if we were to collapse that marine-based portion of it that would lead to something like five meters or about 16 feet on average around the globe. But there's a spatial pattern to that sea level rise. Some areas would be higher; so here on the U.S. east coast, unfortunately for you, you will see a greater amount of sea level rise there if that melt water comes from the west Antarctic ice sheet.
So, how does this help us to improve our projections into the future? The same models that get run into the future to project how the ice sheets will respond are also run during these past time periods. So, I work closely with these modelers and they try to get their models to fit the data that we're producing based on our observations of what happened in the past. If they can get their models to fit our data, then they have a better constraint on the physics involved and they can use that physics in the model to help make a more robust projection of how sea level rise will unfold in the future.
So in other words, they're using our data to calibrate those models that get used to do the sea level projections. How does this help us address uncertainty and plan for the future in communities dealing with this? A lot of people focus on the uncertainty. I've mentioned there's some uncertainty about how quickly that Antarctic ice sheet will retreat. But look at the flipside of the coin. We are certain that sea level rise is going to continue to rise and that what we're looking at now is just the first step in a very long journey. So, what we need to do is kind of redefine our relationship to the coastline as it continues to evolve and march landward.
The second story is a little bit shorter that I'm going to tell you today and that's about the work that we've been doing with tide gauges. And we have been focused specifically looking at the region along the U.S. Atlantic coast. And I got involved in this because from the year 2011 to 2015 we saw dramatic acceleration in the rate of sea level rise south of Cape Hatteras all the way down to Miami. And we saw about five inches of sea level rise in five years. So, you heard some numbers before. Three millimeters a year, the global average rate of sea level rise. That equates to about one foot per century, as Michael said, and all of a sudden, we got five inches in five years?
So, what caused that to happen? It turns out there is some natural variability in the rate of sea level rise. It will have some short-term accelerations and people have referred to these as hotspots of sea level rise. The name is a little bit of a misnomer. It has nothing to do with the temperature of the water but just the focused area where you see an acceleration of sea level rise. And it's due to natural variability that we see between the ocean and the atmosphere. Part of this is due to the El Niño cycle and part of it is due to something that we call the North Atlantic Oscillation, which looks at the pressure of the atmosphere on the surface of the ocean and acts kind of like a seesaw over the North Atlantic basin, changing the ocean currents and causing the water to pile up against the U.S. east coast.
So, what we've found is that these rates of, like, five inches per year were not unprecedented if we look back over the last century. And so, this is a natural variability of the system that will superimpose on the gradual sea level rise that is projected into the future. So, how does that change our projection into the future? We need to prepare for the fact that we could get these short-term, multiyear accelerations in sea level rise. So, we need to plan for having an envelope around our sea level rise projections that we could get these short-term accelerations. But it's most likely we're going to be unable to predict exactly when those are going to happen. So, it's just something we need to build in as a buffer as we move into the future. Thank you.
Rick Weiss: Thanks, Andrea. Super clear. Sophie, tell us what you're up to in Antarctica.
Sophie Nowicki: Right. So, I'm an ice sheet modeler and I use models to make projections of future sea level in a timescale of every 100 years, roughly. And before we start, I just want to remind us that … timescale is actually not so far. I've been very fortunate to have my grandmother to live to the age of 105 years old. She just passed away this December. But we just celebrated the five-years-old birthday of my youngest son. And so, it means that for many years, I had to deal with a difference in generation over 100 years. So, when I think about the 100-year projection, this is something that my children get to see.
So, what does it mean? I mean, using a model? What is a model? It sounds a bit scary but actually you use models every day all the time in your life. When bridges are being built, you don't just build a bridge and then let trucks go along it. And then hope that the bridge doesn't collapse. And then if the bridge collapses, build a stronger bridge. No. You use actually physics and mathematics to basically design the best bridge. And the design that you're using reflects the condition on what you're building your bridge along. So, then if you need to have a bridge that has many roads, you make it a different way, and you get the idea. So, basically, bridges are being built based on a rough estimate of physics and mathematics that takes in account all the facts that are then important.
And so for ice sheet models, it's just the same thing. We build an ice sheet model based on what is important for ice sheets and some of the physics and mathematics. So, currently we have about 13 ice sheet models that I use to make projections of future sea level rise. And nine of them have been coupled to climate models. And there's about five models that are really being developed in the U.S. They are different. And why are they different? Well, it's because usually when they've been created at the start, they might have had a very slight different interest. So, for example, the ice sheet system model built at NASA GTL is really designed to make the full use of the observations that NASA collects. But then you have another ice sheet model called the Community Earth System Model that's specifically being built to be coupled to the community system model. And so, it has very different needs. So, different flavors. But at their core, all of the models use strong physics and mathematics that we know can be used to describe the ice behaviors and its interaction with the earth system. And by the earth system, I mean that the ice reacts with the atmosphere, the ocean, and the solid earth.
So, what do we know about ice sheets when I build a model? Well, we know that they grow to snowfall. So, if you go on an ice sheet and you take a snow pick, or if you fly with a snow radar of an ice sheet, you can just see there's like very thin layers of snowfall each year. And so, the youngest layer being on top of the ice sheet, and as you dig deeper or you see deeper with your radar the ice layers as being older. Just like when you cut a tree and then you kind of count the trimmings? Basically, you can see you have those layers that tell you how old the tree is and how fast the tree grew. Well, we can go back to an ice sheet and kind of count the layers and kind of see how much accumulation has been in the past.
But you shouldn't think of an ice sheet as just being that snow falling and making this big massive snowball and nothing happening. Basically, an ice sheet actually is a very dynamic system. It flows, just like if you were making a pancake. When you're making a pancake in a pan, you put the dough in the middle and it's going to spread slowly towards the edge of the pan, making a nice shape of a pancake. Well, ice sheets behave that way. You model them as a fluid that flows very slowly. How fast the ice is going to flow really depends on what's at the bottom of the very thick ice. If the ice - the entirety of the ice sheets usually the ice is flowing over a really, really hard bedrock and it's frozen. And so, it's kind of a very, very, very slow flow. But as the ice spreads towards the continent towards the ocean, it starts flowing over sediment of water. And it forms those rivers of ice sheets, making ice streams. And, basically, the ice flows very, very rapidly and can take speed of the order of kilometers per year.
So, what else do we know about ice sheets? Well, we know it can crack. It can crack. It can make a massive iceberg. A good example is the one that was formed last year in 2017 from the Pine Island Glacier. It was the size of Manhattan. It was a big chunk of ice that cracked. And after an iceberg calving event, observations of ice thickness and ice velocities, show us that the ice inland starts to speed up. So, now we also know that ice can lose mass at the surface of the ice sheet, just at the top of the ice sheet, basically where the temperature gets really hot. And so, the snow can melt at the surface. And also, ice physically also loses mass when it stops flowing over the ocean because the ocean can start melting the ice. So basically, ice sheets grow because of snowfall, spreads towards the coast and towards the ocean. They will lose mass by iceberg calving or by melting underneath the ice shelf or on top of the ice sheet. And so, a lot of the knowledge of ice sheet behavior is linked to the observation that the satellites have made or the observation that we've made on the field just by people walking on the field bringing stuff with it. And as new processes have been implemented we basically includes those into our model.
So, what do we know not so well about projections? Like, why are there so many models and why when you're going to read something the number seems to be different? Basically anything that happens underneath the ice sheet we don't really know. Because basically the ice sheets are so thick that you can't necessarily be able to see what's underneath them. And so, for example, we don't really know where the ice is basicallyfrozen and sticking to the bedrock or where the ice can flow rapidly over soft sediment. When you have water that's melting at the surface, you can see it's crack on the surface that water can go deep underneath the ice sheet and reach the bed and make the ice flow faster. But we don't really know how much of that ice goes, and whether it's a true effect of this water hitting the bed, making the ice easier to slip away.
Finally, it is important that we don't really know the shape of the bedrock or where the ice flows over. So, as part of Operation IceBridge - it was NASA's campaign that investigates by aircraft. And one of the things that they were able to see with the radar is the shape of the bedrock. And so, in 2013 they flew over a glacier in northern Greenland and they discovered a canyon that was the size of the Grand Canyon or bigger. And what it meant is that this canyon could link the ocean to the interior. So, it meant that if something happened at the boundary where the ice basically met the ocean and the ice sheet tried collapse if it does. But now, basically because it ice sheet can basically go right back in and it cannot be stopped. And that's something that we didn't know two years ago until we had those measurements.
Another good example is for in Antarctica to get better knowledge of the bed. That there have been some studies that shows that using two different bedrocks can lead to a difference of 20 percent of future sea level rise and in 100 years. And in that study, 20 percent was 0.1 meters. So, the bed really matters, and unfortunately, the bed is hard to see. And so basically, some of the uncertainty in suitable projection is just because we don't what the bed looks like. Another good example is that ice can change directions where the ice sheet floats over the ocean. Again, we can't observe it. It's very hard to look underneath the these ice sheets and so ice sheet modellers cannot make good modeling. We try our best to make a model about how the ice and the ocean interact. And so, a few years ago there were like three studies about Thwaites Glacier that gave quite different numbers. And the only reason that they gave different numbers on how Thwaites was going to react in the future was just the way that modellers worked the equation about how the ice and the ocean reacted and interacted.
So, another great example, too, is basically iceberg calving. We know that the ice cracks. But it's really hard to actually implement that into a model. And it's really hard - like, we don't really have a good understanding about what causes this ice to crack. So basically, there is lots of factors that we don't really know how to implement in that model. But the thing is that whenever there's a ... we don't really how to implement them. As you modeller's know, we take a lot of thought on trying to describe the processes for our model. And so, we might get there a different way. If we all get the same answers, it means that the process that we're trying to describe that we don't really know is really captured into our models. But if we all get a very different answer to a response of the same process, then it means that we just have more work to do to try and understand this process better. And this work will be helped with - that we also need to have more observation or more people doing experiments in the field or in the lab.
So finally, one of the factors about why it's so hard to make projections of future sea level rise is because us humans have an impact on future climate. And we're going to impact with the choices we make every day by impacting how much the oceans and the atmosphere is going to warm. And it's something that myself, as the modeller, I have to try to incorporate into our models.
Rick Weiss: Thanks, Sophie, for clarifying a lot of the factors that go into understanding all those variables. And reminding us that we are, behaviorally, one of those variables. Ben, why don't you bring it home?
Ben Strauss: Perfect. Thanks so much, Rick. Pleasure to be here. So, I thought I would start by trying to recap some of the main points from Michael, Andrea, and Sophie. To begin, we've seen around six inches of sea level rise over the course of the 20th century, and that's a global average. Local values vary. But about six inches, which is more important that it seems, and I'll return to that. We know in terms of looking towards future sea level rise that ice sheets - the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica - are going to be key in the equation. They hold the vast majority of potential sea level rise. And we know from the long-term, ancient geological evidence that those ice sheets are extremely sensitive to changes in temperature. So that temperatures similar to today or very slightly warmer are associated with sea levels. And they have been 20 or 30 feet higher in the past.
It is much harder for us to project how quickly sea level will rise, as compared to how much it will rise. One thing is to look back in the record and see the kind of resting place sensitivity of how high the oceans might get compared to a given warmth. But we can't resolve that historical record down to the decade level that's interesting for our projections today to give us guidance around how quickly sea level might rise. And even if we could resolve the historical record that well, of course conditions then were a little bit different from conditions today. And we have tremendous challenges in understanding how the ice sheets will respond in detail that Sophie described.
These are massive formations in very remote and harsh locations where we have relatively little data. Almost no long-term observational data to develop trendlines and a sense of behavior over a multi-decade or century timescales in recent time. And it's very expensive and difficult to make observations. The ice sheets move slowly. We don't have the benefit of being able to run experiments, except for the one that we're running right now on a planetary scale. So, there are a lot of challenges and a lot of reason to focus our attention there. Some research and researchers looking at the west Antarctic ice sheets suggest that while today those ice sheets are contributing on the order inches per century to sea level, there are certain thresholds that can be tripped after which we might expect them to contribute feet per decade for a short period, as the basins empty out once basically ice dams and blockades have been removed and the flow of glaciers and ice sheets into the ocean can be released.
So, now I want to put this into a little bit more context of what it means for people who live on this planet and near the coasts. And first, I thought I'd give a global perspective very briefly. If we could show the first slide, there's a map of the globe that was published in the New York Times several years ago based on an analysis that I did with colleagues. And the point here is not to look at the details but rather the size of the squares indicates the number of people living on land that could be permanently inundated or subject to chronic flooding by the end of the century. And you can see that on a global scale, this problem is very strongly concentrated in Asia. Five out of six of the world's people who live on vulnerable land live in Asia. And that's a great concern in terms of prompting migration over time and instability in the region.
Of course, I have to put an important caveat on that research if we move to the next slide. It's based on a global elevation data set that is extremely poor and which is another source of uncertainty in our understanding of the impact of sea level rise. Fortunately, we have much better elevation data in the United States and the panel shows two pictures. Land less than five feet above the local high tide line that is in blue on one side of the right-hand panel. I think that's more filled in. That's based on high-quality, laser rangefinder data called lidar taken in the United States.
And on the left panel is the satellite-based data that we use for global research and, for example, for those numbers in Asia. And you'll see that much less land area appears to be affected. And the reason is that the satellite-based data that the entire research community uses to understand global threats and threats in Asia are measuring treetops and building tops and averaging those into our ground to elevations. So, on average, the elevations are two to three meters too high in the coastal zone. And we're talking about one to two meters of sea level rise in this century. So, that error is actually a major source of uncertainty that we have not really invested in or focused on. And unfortunately, the direction of the arrow we understand quite clearly that as we improve elevation data, we will come to see that many more people are at threat than we currently recognize.
Moving into the United States, I want to talk about some of the other factors that lead to local impacts. There's a lot of variation in the rate of sea level rise if we move to the next slide. You'll see kind of recent sea level rise rates, historic sea level rise rates from around the United States as tracked by NOAA. And there are many causes for that variation that you should be aware of if you're doing a local story. In some places in particular, the land is sinking. In other places, more rarely - particularly Alaska - land is rising. But in Louisiana and the Chesapeake Bay area, and in fact - in those two areas, land is sinking particularly fast and in many other areas of the United States it's sinking slowly. Over the last century the sinking rates were, in places, comparable to sea level rise from climate change and global warming. But in this coming and in the current century we expect the rates due to warming to dwarf the rates from sinking land in those locations.
Another factor that affects how a locality experiences this threat is simply the pattern of topography and development relative to that topography. So, you have major metro areas, like in south Florida which are on very flat, very low-lying lands with high population density. And then you have in southern California, Los Angeles which has a lot of topographic relief. It's much hillier and higher. So, very simple but quite important in determining the threat locally. Another less-appreciated factor is the importance of the bedrock under a city or geography. In most cases, the bedrock is solid and largely impermeable. But in south Florida, unfortunately, most of the bedrock is porous, like a sponge. So that, even if protective levees were to be built, water would penetrate underneath those structures and come up through the grounds, making defense measures much more difficult in that geography.
I should also add, moving to the next slide, that sea level rise very much amplifies the effect of coastal flooding. And that's really how we're experiencing sea level rise today and will in the coming few decades, making coastal floods more frequent, higher, more destructive. So, colleagues and I are currently working on research that indicates that a significant fraction of the damages from superstorm Sandy can be linked to human-caused sea level rise, those last few inches. Looking retrospectively, and this connects to the chart that you see in front of you, we counted up the number of coastal floods at 27 tide gauges around the United States since 1950 as they occurred. Then we subtracted out human caused sea level rise to see how many would have occurred without that effect.
In fact, it's two-thirds of floods at those 27 tide gauges would not have been classified as floods without human caused sea level rise, in our analysis. Our sea level rise tipped--really, we're talking about minor floods, but it tipped them over the balance for something that would have been just high water, which is something that the national weather services locally defines as a flood event based on their local observations of roads flooding and infrastructure impact. Even a few inches is already shaping this exponential growth curve in the frequency of coastal floods, that you can see plainly in that graph.
Finally, an important factor in what impact sea level rise will have, besides how much more carbon we put in the atmosphere, is how we respond in the places that we live along the coast, what we do in our cities and rural areas in terms of developing defenses, accommodating more floods, or retreating from rising waters. Maybe I'll wrap it up by giving a very brief tour around the United States to give a sense of exposures at just a couple of elevations. If you look at the state level populations on land less than half a meter above the high tide line, California actually has the most.
This is an elevation range where we can expect this much sea level rise in the second half of this century at some point, under almost any scenario. About 85,000 people in California live less than half a meter, or 1.8 feet, above local high tide. Only around 63,000 people in Florida live on that land, and around 31,000 people in Louisiana. I'm excluding people who are protected by levees that are in place. Otherwise, the number in Louisiana would be much greater. If you jump to one and a half meters, which is in between a lower and higher end estimates of sea level rise we might see by the end of the century, the order really flips with 1.2 million people in Florida living on land that low, so a very dramatic uptick. Versus a number two slot in California at just several hundred thousand, followed by New Jersey at 260,000. Ranking counties at half a meter: San Mateo County is number one in the country, followed by Mirren, followed by Terrebonne in Louisiana.
But at one and a half meters, it's Miami Dade, Broward, and Pinellas, all in Florida. I should add that if we do that by percentage of the population and not the total number, the really big threat is, first and foremost, in North Carolina, where in Hyde County 36% of the population lives less than half a meter above the high tide line. Seven other counties nationwide have more than 10% of their population there.
For more details like this, I want to advertise a tool that colleagues and I have built with input from the research community and coastal managers around the country. It's called Risk Finder. You can find it at riskfinder.org, and you can look up there, for whatever ZIP Codes, city, county, or state you chose, how many people live on land below different elevation thresholds and look at integrated projections of sea level rise and flood risk, as well, and explore toxic waste sites, infrastructure exposure and a great other diversity of things.
To wrap it up, we already know a lot about sea level rise. We have a lot more to learn, especially around the ice sheets and how quickly they might decay this century. As the South Florida Sun Sentinel put it in an editorial just a month ago or so, at least for some parts of the country, for South Florida, they're headline to this editorial launching--a very special journalistic project in south Florida, an alliance between three papers, the three largest papers sharing a common pool of reporters and stories for a full year. They're launching editorial headline was "Sea Level Rise: The Defining Issue of This Century." There are some places in the United States to which that is absolutely true.
Rick Weiss: Thank you, Ben. Fantastic wrap up and thank all four of you, first of all, for really very clear presentations. I'm so glad we got to do this with you. For reporters online, if you've got questions as Josh mentioned, you can type them in the Q&A box there, and I will see them here and be able to convey them to the panelists. We already have a couple in, so let me just get started. One is from Mary Landers at the Savannah Morning News. Just a definitional question but a good one to make sure we get our terms right. She's saying she realizes she doesn't really know the difference between iceberg, ice sheet, and glacier. I don't know. Maybe, Sophie, this is for you. Is there any easy way to keep those things straight or are they all synonymous?
Sophie Nowicki: Yeah. No, it's a very good question. Basically, an ice sheet--when I talk about an ice sheet, I talk about Greenland and Antarctica as a whole. It's basically this ice that flows over the massive continents, and so they are typically a few miles thick and then super, super wide. So the full volume of Greenland that was melted could give rise to seven meters of sea level rise. Antarctica is like 67 or something like that.
A glacier can be in two forms. There are the glaciers of what you're used to when you go and hike a national park in the US, those little glaciers that flow down the mountains. But ice sheets also have glaciers. When I talk about the glaciers in ice sheets, it's basically those regions of the ice sheet that are flowing very, very, very fast like a river of ice. An ice berg is basically a chunk of this ice sheet or this glacier from either the same world that basically has been cut off from the main part of the ice sheet. And basically, it's cut off because there's been a crack that has developed at the top and at the bottom. The piece, it's a chunk of its own little ice cube, that basically you chop up an ice cube and that little old thing keeps flowing by itself into the sea. Right now, if you look, I think there's some beautiful pictures of ice bergs flowing in Canada, amazing pictures that I think are on the BBC website or CNN, like really beautiful icebergs flowing on water. That's basically just ice that has been chunked off from the ice sheet and is flowing away into water by itself. It could be Manhattan-sized.
Rick Weiss: A question from Maryann Mesina, who I believe is a freelancer, wondering what kind of helpful new data are we able to capture when these dramatic events happen where a chunk of ice breaks away off of a glacier or an ice sheet? What can that teach us? I'm not sure if that's Andrea or Sophie or anyone want to address that?
Michael Oppenheimer: Let me just make one comment. When larger ice bergs break away, we sometimes can look at the response of the rest of the ice that's left behind. Sometime ago, early in this century, a set of ice bergs formed at once by the disintegration of an ice shelf, from the Larson B ice shelf. It's disintegration, this is of the Antarctic peninsula, which is that thumb that points up towards South America.
The function of that ice shelf and other ice shelves sometimes is to hold the ice behind it that's land based, to keep it on the land because the ice shelves themselves, as they drift away from the land base, they're like tongues that drift off the land-based ice. They get jammed against geological features like rises on the sea floor or the edges of the bays in which the ice shelves exist. But as they fragment and the ice bergs that form break away, the ice behind those ice shelves that's based on land starts to move faster, in fact. One of the very important pieces of information that we picked up by watching the disintegration of this Larson ice shelf is that all the land-based ice in back of it started to accelerate rather rapidly after the ice shelf broke into ice bergs and was no longer there. Watching those margins, watching what happens in response to a change like the break off of an ice berg is a very important opportunity to scientists.
Rick Weiss: Great. We have a question here from Kathy Kowalski at Science News for Students saying she could benefit from some better distinction between higher than ever sea level rise, generally, and storm surge levels, in particular. Is there one or the other of those that engineers and policy makers should be giving more weight to for planning purposes, and how should journalists distinguish between those two things for their lay readers?
Ben Strauss: Maybe I'll take a crack at that. Storm surge is really what you have to worry about today. Sandy had a nine-foot storm surge, and none but the very highest of sea level rise projections get to nine feet anywhere by the end of this century. It's possible today to have these events that are damaging in a short term. Of course, a permanent rise of nine feet would be drastically more difficult than a temporary flood.
But really, the challenge is in the combination of sea level rise and storm surge because the truth is that most of our cities probably aren't well designed even for rare big storm surge events as they would naturally occur today with the current sea level, or even sea level five inches below where we are today. We already build a lot in the 100-year flood plain, for example.
That probably is only going to get much worse as the sea level continues to rise and we have floods with more and more frequency in areas that aren't accustomed to seeing them and therefore probably haven't been engineered or developed to protect. One metaphor I like to use is think of a damaging flood a little bit like a dunk in a basketball game. Dunks are hard to get.
They don't happen that often, but now image somehow the level of the basketball floor, and the dunk is the storm surge event--now imagine the level of the basketball floor was slowly rising. The basket got shorter. Suddenly, you would be getting dunks all the time, and you wouldn't need a lot of rise to accomplish that. That's how sea level rise and storm surge interact.
Rick Weiss: Great metaphor. Thank you. We're getting close to the end of our time, but I want to get at least one more question in. We might go a couple minutes over if we need to. We do have a question from a freelance journalist in India, asking a good question of to what extent does sea level rise potentially effect marine ecosystems and biodiversity and the ecology of the oceans themselves? Does someone want to pick that up?
Michael Oppenheimer: One effect on coral reefs is coral reefs have to keep in pops near the ocean surface. If sea level rise--under certain conditions, it can rise too fast for the coral reefs to keep up, so that's one example. Although coral reefs have a lot of other problems like the warming of the ocean and acidification itself. Another issue is sea level rise drowns costal marshes, and under conditions where there wasn't a lot of infrastructure and settlement behind the coast, the marshes would probably be able to move inland fast enough. But in the developed world, like much of the United States, Australia and Europe, these marshes have nowhere to go.
Andrea Dutton: I would add that those marshes are important for biodiversities, is what the question asked about, because the mangroves are nurseries for a lot of the fishes and so forth. If you lose those crucial habitats, it will be a very big issue for the biodiversity.
Rick Weiss: Let's take a few more questions and let this stretch a little bit before we close off. Ing Fay Chen, a freelancer writer from the West Coast, has a question about the map that you showed, Ben, showing interestingly that actually there's some sea level decrease predicted as well along, for example, the coast of Alaska and Western Canada. What's that about?
Ben Strauss: That's about the land there in some areas of Alaska is rising more quickly than the sea level is rising. Even though if you took the absolute elevation of the water surface, it is going up. The elevation of the land is going up faster, and so the effect on a tide gauge, a kind of water level measuring device on the shore, it would make it seem like the water level was going down. The reason behind a lot of vertical land motion in general has to do with the Earth's slow response to changes since the last ice age.
Ice sheets, and there used to be a massive ice sheet covering most of Canada, with incursions into the United States, 10,000 years ago, are extremely heavy, and they compress the Earth underneath them. I think of it a little bit like a person sitting on a mattress. The person is the ice sheet, and the mattress is the Earth underneath. When a person sits down on a mattress, the mattress compresses under the person, and when the person gets up, the mattress, that section that was under him, springs back up.
That's what's happening in Alaska. Now, in other areas that weren't under the person, when the person sits down on the mattress, the part under him goes down, but the part away from him actually goes up like a lever. When he gets up, that part away sinks back down. That sinking back down is what's happening in most of the United States which wasn't under an ice sheet in the last ice age.
Rick Weiss: Great. One more question, and we'll go until about five after here. Mary Landers again at the Savannah Morning News wants to follow up on your statement--I think this was--Michael, this might have been you. Six inches of sea level rise could translate to about 50 feet less beach, at least in some parts of the East Coast. She's wondering if these kinds of calculations are available for specific areas for reporters who want to report on what's going to predictably happen right where they are, and how reliable are those kinds of statistics?
Michael Oppenheimer: So that particular hundred to one ratio is something called the Brood Rule. It's very rough, and it kind of tries to accommodate all the different situations at all the beaches around the world. In order to really get a usable, local answer, what I would do is talk to the folks at your nearby institute of oceanography, for instance. And some of them have done local estimates of what happens on particular beaches. It's not easy to do. The models are difficult because they have to take account of many factors at once.
I don't know of any global--I know global databases on overall beach loss, but when you get down to the particular level that you might be interested in, you really need to go to regional or local experts who may have done the specific model. There's information on historical loss. If you're interested in future loss, you have to use the modeling, and that's what the problem is.
Ben Strauss: I might add I feel like I've read that most beaches that are visited by tourists in Florida have actually been nourished, replenished with sand that's brought it. I wouldn't be surprised if the same were the case in Georgia. It's not a projection, but if you snooped around, you might find that most any beach that is important in your area is already being replenished with sand. If that's the case, it would be an indicator that a threat is underway, and it's actually being counteracted. There are other questions about how sustainable and how much we can keep up by replenishing the sand on beaches artificially.
Rick Weiss: I'm going to give one more question here, and this is coming from Kevin Loria at Business Insider. It relates to your point, Andrea, earlier, that the records indicate that when temperatures were about what they are now, sea levels were 20 to 30 feet higher than they are. The question is does that indicate that basically that much change is built in, that we're going to get there, and that the only real question at this point is how quickly? Or is there still room to prevent or change that kind of outcome?
Andrea Dutton: That's a great question, and that example I gave from the past, as we mentioned before, is not necessarily going to be a perfect analog for what we see in the future. But we did see a repeated pattern of hitting that. So it's reasonable to assume that we're going to get a lot of that sea level rise based on the amount of temperature rise that we have already seen. But, for example, one of the ways in which that past time period is not analogous to today is that right now, we're heating our atmosphere by adding greenhouse gasses, which increases the temperatures at both polls of the Earth simultaneously.
That was not the same forcing mechanism that we saw in the past where it was kind of one pole at a time was being heated by variations in the orbit of the Earth around the Sun. What I sometimes say to people is actually it could be worse because now we're forcing Greenland and Antarctica at the same time, whereas before there was a little bit of what we call bio-polar see-saws, the play off between the two poles, one getting heated and the other one.
Certainly, it gives you the idea that these ice sheets are, as we said before, very sensitive to what you might think of as a very small change in global mean temperature. Remember, though, if you drop temperature by four degrees Celsius global mean, that's what happened during the last ice age. So four degrees doesn't sound like a lot, unless you could be under a couple miles of ice in New York City or in Canada or wherever you are. Small temperature changes can mean big things for the Earth.
Rick Weiss: Gives real new meaning to the Goldilocks zone that we're living in. I want to thank you all for a fantastic set of presentations. Thanks to the reports for logging in and for doing everything you do to get the best evidence out there into your stories. I want to encourage you all to follow us at SciLine at @RealSciLine and check out our website.
It's sciline.org, for more information about how we can help you as you do your reporting, finding you the best experts and expertise and contextually information to help you get more of that actual, good scientific evidence into every story that you write. Thanks, everybody, for participating, and we'll look forward to seeing you again at the next SciLine media briefing.
About This Media Briefing
Sea levels are rising as a consequence of climate change, and rising oceans will affect many millions of people in the years ahead. But how much will the seas rise, and how fast? Some predictions focus on changes measurable in millimeters or inches—scales that might seem modest and adaptable—while others paint a dire picture of radically changed coastlines within our lifetimes.
SciLine's June 6 Media Briefing explained in clear terms how scientists model and project sea level rise, and how to interpret and communicate the range of possible outcomes accurately and in proper context to your readers, listeners, and viewers.
The panelists:
- Dr. Andrea Dutton, Associate Professor of Geology, University of Florida
- Dr. Sophie Nowicki, Research Scientist and Deputy Chief for the Cryospheric Sciences Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
- Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School and the Department of Geosciences at Princeton University, and Faculty Associate of the Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences Program, Princeton Environmental Institute
- Dr. Ben Strauss, President, CEO, and Chief Scientist, Climate Central
- Rick Weiss, director of SciLine, moderated the discussion


text:
One on One Meditation Coaching
There are often times when we feel lost and out of touch with our intuitive selves. While we are bound to go through bouts of this throughout our lives, there are many practical ways we can reconnect with ourselves when we do.
Meditation helps us to train our attention and awareness, and in doing this achieve an emotionally and mentally clear state. In meditation we connect to our higher selves, and in this connection have parts of ourselves revealed which would otherwise remain hidden.
We offer guided meditation sessions to help you in your unique journey to self awareness.
1 x 45min guided meditation session $60
4 x 45min guided meditation sessions $200
To book, email Haidee at firstname.lastname@example.com or phone 021635962


text:
055: Can You Practice Part-Time And Still Support Your Family, Too?
Imagine that you work no more than 25 hours per week, and that you still earn an abundant income to provide for your family.
You'd have plenty of time to watch your children grow, to have date nights with your husband, and to get back to your regular workout routine.
It seems too good to be true, doesn't it?!
Well, actually, it's NOT!
In this episode, Dr. Danielle clarifies some of the most important things you need to have if you want to design a practice model that allows you to work 25 hours a week or less and earn $100,000 per year or more.
Here's a preview of some of the points discussed on the podcast today:
Belief is your new best friend. Believe that all things are possible!
You'll have to keep an open mind about a different way of designing your practice.
Boundaries will be ever more important.
This type of practice model requires confidence, but that doesn't mean what you think...
You will have to be persistent and consistent.
After you've listened, head over to this thread in Mama Chiropractors and let us know your most important take-away from this conversation. See you there!
Not already a member of Mama Chiropractors? No problem! Just click here to request to join our amazing (and free) group of women in chiropractic balancing motherhood and practice together.
Ready to dive into the 5-part video series on working 25 hours a week or less but earning $100,000 per year or more? Start here!
Video 1: "Can I Work Part-Time And Still Support My Family?"
Video 2: "I Can't Figure Out How To Find Time For Everything I Need To Do As A Mom And A Practice Owner. Can You Help?"
Video 3: "How Much Money Do I Really Need To Make To Be Able To Cover My Business Expenses, My Family's Needs and Wants, and My Student Loans?"
BONUS RESOURCE: Podcast Episode 025 - Knowing Your Critical Numbers
Video 4: "How Can I Get My Practice To Grow When I'm Already So Overwhelmed With Managing It ALL?"
Video 5: "How Quickly Can I Fill My Practice Schedule And Start Taking Money Home To My Family?"
If you find value in this sneak peek of the what's offered inside The Aligned Women Team group coaching membership, then be sure to join the waitlist to find out when enrollment opens.
Want More From Aligned Women?
Like the Aligned Women Facebook Page
Subscribe to The Aligned Women Podcast in iTunes


text:
Size 4 Draped Silk Jacquard Blouse
$ 328.00
$ 825.00
Sample Sale! Size 4 Kate Stoltz draped delicate floral silk jacquard blouse with black crepe back silk 3/8" trim finish.
*This sample was made with the same quality textiles and techniques as our made to measure dresses. This blouse was worn briefly for the Kate Stoltz lookbook photoshoot.
Side zipper closure with hook and eye, with center back snap at neck.
Made in New York City
100% Silk


text:
Your cart is empty!
Wear over lipstick or alone for a dazzling pop of color and brilliant shine. Not discountable.
Wear over lipstick or alone for a dazzling pop of color and brilliant shine. Luscious, light weight, non-sticky feel.
the lip gloss with the wand applicator to ensure smooth application. Can be
worn over lipstick or alone.
Cera Alba (Beeswax) – Pure wax derived from honeycombs, provides a thickening agent for cosmetics and creates thin layer between the skin and external elements, allowing the skin to retain moisture.
Base Ingredients: Polyisobutene, Paraffinum Liquidum, Beeswax, Aroma, Benzyl Alcohol, Propylene Glycol, BHA, Propyl Gallate, Citric Acid, Ricinus Communis (Castor) Seed Oil. May Contain: Mica, Talc, Red 6 Lake (CI 15850), Yellow 5 Lake (CI 19140), Blue 1 Lake (CI 42090), Red 21 Lake (CI 45380) Iron Oxides (CI 77491, CI 77492, CI 77499), Titanium Dioxide (CI 77891), Tin Oxide
Not a huge fan of wearing any makeup on my lips, but I really liked Warm Sand because it kept my lips hydrated, and also had a very low-key, subtle color.