I think New York City's idea on building sea barriers to stop flooding can really work. In the New York Times, Mireya Navarro wrote an article called New York Is Lagging As Seas and Risks Rise, Critics Warn. In this article it talks about sea levels rising and what steps New York are taking to help flooding and other risks. A lot of New Yorkers think we should concentrate on preventing floods, "like armoring city waterways with the latest high-tech barriers"(Navarro). Its smart to plan ahead and build sea barriers because its not only a good investment for our future but it might just be a big help. If we can spend so much money on the after effects of a storm then why cant we spend money to prevent flooding of New York City. It is better to prepared.

The feedback I have received from my peers really helped me understand what i needed to work on. They had told me to work on my citations. I have quotes in my essay but i did not cite them properly. Another feedback they had given me was about my thesis. My thesis can be a stronger thesis if i work on it a little more. My peers certainly liked specific information i provided in my essay from the book The Climate Casino. I gave details on what can be done to help get New York City prepared. I defiantly want to concentrate more on my thesis and conclusion. I think i should plan out my structure more and really work on the flow of my essay. My biggest concern on this essay is the overall message I'm trying to portray. i want my letter to the mayor to be very informative on why I think New York City is not ready for climate change. Also I'm concerned on whether or not i will get an A. I feel as if in class we can maybe learn more about the structure of the essay and how each detail can flow into the next detail.

Hi my name is Nazneen Chowdhury and i just read the New York times article, New York Is Lagging as Seas and Risks Rise, Critics Warn. In this article it talks about whether or not New York city is prepared for sea levels rising and flooding due to storms. A lot of people can argue that New York city is not yet prepared for such impact and the progress is taking forever. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's administration are expanding wetlands to accommodate surging tides, installing green roofs to absorb rainwater and prodding property owners to move boilers out of flood-prone basements, but is it enough? If flooding were to occur, it can paralyze our whole transportation system which can lead to the loss of billions of dollars. During the time of Hurricane Irene, 370,000 people were ordered to evacuate as well as New York city's subway systems being shut down. Hurricane Irene did not hit us as hard as we thought but if it did then it could have been really bad. A lot of researchers and engineers believe the best option would be to create sea gates that can close during a storm and prevent water surges. In Douglas Hill's words "They lack a sense of urgency about this". Douglas Hill is one among the many who want sea gates being built. He believes, instead of planning to be flooded, New York City should prevent the flooding in whatever necessary means it takes. Sea levels have been rising roughly an inch a decade in New York City over the last century. This pretty much means that within a few more years flooding can become more frequent and even the littlest storms can flood the city. New York city is taking a few steps and incorporating flood protecting measures in certain projects. In Brooklyn, porous riprap rock and a soft edge of salt-resistant grass have been laid in to help absorb the impact of a storm surge. Consolidated Edison have already spent about 24 million dollars since 2007 in raising submersible switches and moving high-voltage transformers above ground level. Discussions on barriers to be built to block sea tides have been going on for a while. To build tide blocks will cost roughly 10 billion dollars. There are more talks on how to protect the subway system. New York City still has not come up with a set plan on how to stop flooding.
Jim Gordon left a comment regarding this New York times article stating that we should really start using clean and renewable energy. He mentions "Spending billions of dollars to build sea gates without an Apollo like effort to stem the flow of carbon pollution currently accelerating rising sea levels, warming oceans and more intense an frequent storms is like treating the symptoms without curing the disease". He is technically saying we are trying to prevent floods in New York City but what about the main problem that is causing the rise of sea levels so rapidly and these torturous storms. The main problem should be looked at first before we start settling for anything else. And that main problem is global warming!!

Hi my name is Nazneen Chowdhury and I am learning about climate change in my English 101 class. we are reading the book The Climate Casino by William Nordhaus. In this book, there are a lot of graphs that portray information about climate and weather change over the years. On page 46 and 47 in the book, there are two graphs that both show temperature rising from the nineteenth century to the near future. On page 46, figure 8,  the graph shows temperatures that have been measured by thermometers by three different research groups from the year 1860 till 2012. The three groups in this graph are Hadley Centre, National climate data center and GISS. This graph shows the rise in temperature over the years and predict that the temperature will keep rising. Its amazing to see how all three research groups came out with similar results. This graph has lines going up and down, over lapping one another and showing the rise of temperature.  The second graph on page 47, figure 9, show the estimated temperature rise from year 2000 to 2100. This graph shows the temperature rise for standardized emissions, regional rice models and EMF-22 models.For this graph the results are similar for all the categories. Lines overlap each other and go in a straight diagonal line. The graph estimates, from 1900 to 2100 the global temperature will increase between 1.8 and 4.0 degrees Celsius. Both of these graphs signify that temperature levels are rising and predictions are already being made for the next ninety years. Both graphs are similar in displaying temperature rises but one is a prediction while the other has to do more with facts.

In "The Climate Casino", William Nordhaus states that raising the price on carbon is one of the steps that can be made to stop global warming, on location 146 on the kindle app. I agree with William Nordhaus idea of boosting up the price on carbon. Raising price on carbon would be a big step towards preventing global warming. It seems a bit ridiculous to raise the price on something that us Americans use everyday but if the prices do raise then I'm sure that low carbon based technologies will be invented. If and when we do start using less or no carbon, it will be that first step in making a change for our near future. Raising the price on carbon will not just influence producers on creating none carbon sources of energy but it will influence us to use carbon more sparingly. I believe we use oils and carbon so much now a days because we are not all aware of what is to come. But when the step to raise price on carbon are in process, I'm sure people will most defiantly not be so careless on the use of oils. This step will also aware everyone on the severe measure of global warming. If America raises the price of carbon it will effect the economy drastically and people will realize that what must be done should be done for our planet. If we set an example then maybe other nations will follow and that would be an even bigger step for Earth. Raising the price of carbon in my opinion is a pretty interesting idea and it might just work.