Rob79: sure, all that is sensible. The water will go to those low points and there are interesting economic and engineering challenges ahead. The right approach will vary from place to place.
However the broad economic studies tell us that mitigation, overall, is far less expensive than adaption, though both are now required.
This is a better discussion than the usual here, which is with people in total denial that anything is happening.
That is an interesting report:
"The PwC Low Carbon Economy Index (LCEI) calculates the
rate of decarbonisation of the global economy that is
needed to limit warming to 2°C. We base our analysis on
the carbon budget estimated by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for 2°C.
Emissions per unit of GDP fell in 2013 by 1.2%, marginally
better than the average decrease of 0.9% since 2000. But
with such limited progress in decoupling emissions growth
from GDP growth, the gap between what we are doing and
what we need to do has again grown, for the sixth year
running. The average annual rate of decarbonisation
required for the rest of this century for us to stay within the
two degree budget now stands at 6.2%. This is double the
decarbonisation rate achieved in the UK during the rapid
shift to gas-fired electricity generation in the nineties. While negotiations focus on policies to limit warming to 2°C, based on the decarbonisation rates of the last six years, we are headed for 4°C of warming in global average temperature by the end of the century, with severe consequences identified by the IPCC for ecosystems, livelihoods and economies. "
