Study Suggests Buried Internet Infrastructure at Risk as Sea Levels Rise (eurekalert.org)

Thousands of miles of buried fiber optic cable in densely populated coastal regions of the United States may soon be inundated by rising seas, according to a new study by researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Oregon. From a report: The study, presented Monday at a meeting of internet network researchers, portrays critical communications infrastructure that could be submerged by rising seas in as soon as 15 years, according to the study's senior author, Paul Barford, a UW-Madison professor of computer science. "Most of the damage that's going to be done in the next 100 years will be done sooner than later," says Barford, an authority on the "physical internet" -- the buried fiber optic cables, data centers, traffic exchanges and termination points that are the nerve centers, arteries and hubs of the vast global information network. "That surprised us. The expectation was that we'd have 50 years to plan for it. We don't have 50 years."

The study, conducted with Barford's former student Ramakrishnan Durairajan, now of the University of Oregon, and Carol Barford, who directs UW-Madison's Center for Sustainability and the Global Environment, is the first assessment of risk of climate change to the internet. It suggests that by the year 2033 more than 4,000 miles of buried fiber optic conduit will be underwater and more than 1,100 traffic hubs will be surrounded by water. The most susceptible U.S. cities, according to the report, are New York, Miami and Seattle, but the effects would not be confined to those areas and would ripple across the internet, says Barford, potentially disrupting global communications.

Comments

Stuff underground gets wet already

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

Stuff underground gets wet already, just in case you didn't know about "rain" and such.

Re:Stuff underground gets wet already

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Stuff underground gets wet already, just in case you didn't know about "rain" and such.

We should just get the Dutch to build the Internet infrastructure. Their whole country is more or less under water, and their Internet stills runs . . . along with everything else.

I think they have invented some kind of anti-gravity water control technology, and just are keeping it as a secret to themselves.

Re: Stuff underground gets wet already

[Anonymous Coward]

All OSP (Outside Plant) fiber optic cable is rated for full immersion. And since measured sea level rise is far less than 0.1 inches per year, in 100 years mean sea level will go up about 10 inches. Assuming it doesnt reverse itself. So move along, ignore the chicken littles.

Re:Stuff underground gets wet already

[blindseer]

The cables under the ocean were placed there and intended to be submerged. The cables buried underground that are currently not underwater, is the point of the article.

We know how to manage underwater cables. We know how quickly the water will rise. We know how deep these cables are. Therefore we know where and when the cables would need to be replaced with submerged rated versions to keep operational. Given that maintenance and upgrades are a thing with any infrastructure that means that there is a budget for this. I understand that it's quite possible for submerged rated cables to cost more than underground rated cables but that only means upgrades might be delayed, or the budget needs to be increased.

If the worst case of sea level rise is some people having their internet be on the blink as the upgrades are going into place then this is a non-problem. I'd be more concerned about things like subway tunnels and such being under water.

Re: Stuff underground gets wet already

[ShanghaiBill]

Are they rated for immersion in SALT water?

Yes.

AGW will cause many serious problems. This isn't one of them.

Stupid ignorant alarmism does nothing but provide ammunition to the denialists.

So all the stuff above ground?

[Revek]

Is in no danger. These are some of the stupidest ideas I've seen lately. Its like the world is static to them and one tiny change triggers a "oh noes all is lost!" response

But the sea level is only rising a few mm per year

[Nutria]

Specifically, averaging 3.2mm, according to Wikipedia. In 15 years, that's only 48mm (less than 2 inches).

How's that going to flood a bunch of stuff that's not on some coral atoll in the South Pacific?

Re:What about the buildings, streets, homes, &

[cascadingstylesheet]

If water is going to rise as predicted, the Internet infrastructure may be the least of the problems, especially if New York City is under sea level, unless the subway is converted into an underwater subway system.

Well, we have to have our priorities.

How will it affect download speeds and gaming latency? That's what I want to know ...

Re:Sooner and spread out is better

[Train0987]

It makes no sense to plan for something that *might* happen 50-100 years for now when we don't even fully understand what that something is, not to mention all of the other unforseen things that *will* happen during that time.

Re:Fake news

[another_twilight]

“unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return.”

Apart from some hand waving, nothing in the article contradicts this statement.

The rest is cherry picking, out of context and exaggeration.

Al Gore was a politician doing his share of exaggeration and simplification, but if this is the standard of your counter arguments, then you are looking for confirmation of a position you already hold. It's an editorial piece, poorly organised, poorly researched and absent even the pretence of balance or impartiality.

*shrug*
I've seen similar patterns of argument in other fields with believers vs science. Cherry pick exceptions and outliers, find some people who have made exaggerated claims that aren't generally held and argue that taints the whole field. Whether a creationist or a climate change denier, the form's the same. 'Skepticism' is fine when it's even handed. When it's a mask for refusing to accept evidence that contradicts a belief it's just denial.

No one should believe what they read on the internet without some due diligence and a critical examination of the material, the presentation and possibly the source and this is unconvincing.

There will always be some people trying to profit from an existing disaster or by convincing you that disaster is coming. You prove nothing by finding such people. How about, instead,

I'd love to find out that anthropocentric climate change is either not changing or is not anthropocentric. It would make life easier and a little more pleasant. I stand to gain nothing by believing and it would make life easier and a little more pleasant to be shown I'm wrong. Being accused, indirectly, of having fallen for a pitch by someone motivated by greed fails to account for both the reluctance to believe and the weight of evidence that has overcome that reluctance. I first saw arguments and evidence for climate change back in the 80s (Dr David Suzuki was the first I can recall). Then it was mostly a topic for academic discussion - there certainly wasn't any money in it.

So 2 inches will flood out the Internet?

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Except recently it's been rising and is accelerating.

That graph looks scary until you look at the scales, and translate milimeters to inches.

It shows the sea level rising by 2 inches in the last century. It also looks very slightly bent up near the end.

Now how you get a error bands of less than +- 1/6 inch when measuring sea level beats me. But let's assume their methodology works. And lets be generous and assume that bend is an exponential. It's a pretty small bend, so let's be REALLY generous and say that the extrapolated next two inches happen in 50 years rather than 100.

So a 2 inch sea level rise in 50 years will flood out the Internet in 10? It only takes (substantially less than) 2/5 of an inch of sea level rise to do it?

I think we need a MUCH scarier graph to support this panic.