My Name is Sandra and in this blog I am responding to an assignment in my English 101 class relating to, a New York times article about climate change. The article explains some of the concerns and how New York is not prepared for flood risk among rising seas. There's a likelihood rising seas will have more severe storms. In the article critics says the state is not up to speed with possible dangers of flooding.
             The mayor has ordered research to be done and prepare installation of green roof to absorb water and advising property owners about removing boilers from basements, but according to Douglas Hill, the state of New York have no sense of urgency as far as being prepared for these situations. Some concerns for places such as the south Bronx and Sunset Park which have waterfronts with chemical plants, oil-storage and garbage can have people walking in dangerous waters. The city needs to address the possibility of rising seas before beginning projects and enforcing regulations.
           It is estimated by Con Edison to cost about 25 million dollars to add submersible switches and high voltage transformers, while some New York planners consider using retractable watertight gates for windows in new buildings. Some believe prevention is the key to the problem, some insist on getting sea gates, but at some point aren't these sea gates going to fail as the sea level continue to rise?
         Jim Gordon believes in order to ensure our health we need to transform clean and renewable energy. Using billions to build sea gates without trying to bine the way carbon pollution is picking up in speed and rising sea levels is like putting a bandage on the wound without treating it. I agree with Jim because it doesn't make sense to spend so much money building sea gates while the sea level is still rising. The sea gates as some point won't work. It makes sense take care of the problem at hand instead of just treating the symptoms and not the actual problem itself.