If the general science is correct - that Climate Change will by mid or end of century raise global temperatures to the hottest they’ve been since the age of the Dinosaurs; that sea level rise will wipe out all major coastal areas; that an unstable climate will mean more common and more intense storms, I ask:
What can be done to preserve our cultural heritage (movies, old manuscripts, art)?
For example, take the negatives of classic films (or films in general). Suppose the studio they’re held in breaks out in an unexpected fire due to rising temperatures. What can we do to prevent such massive loss?
Or art. So many of our greatest works of art are in cities which will likely not exist a century from now - such as Venice. What can we do to preserve them?
Same goes for things such as the original manuscripts of epics, ancient histories and such will still have paper originals - how can we preserve them from being lost to us through Climate change?
Many years ago, there was a Nova special on these gigantic sea locks being installed in the bay outside Venice, meant to prevent flooding at high tide. This is in part, to prevent damage to ancient architecture. It interviewed a noted contessa, who restored medieval frescoes damaged by rising water – and she voiced being mighty ticked off at having to do this again and again.
I believe that the mayor of NYC stated in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, that they may have to look into building some sort of sea wall to protect low-lying parts of Manhattan. Again, this is for architectural legacy.
I believe that the coming climate crisis is the most important problem we have today.
But it has nothing to do with endangering manuscripts, museums, or music. They will not burst into flames because summers will be hotter. Humans are much more vulnerable to heat than objects. If it gets hot enough to burn objects, humans will have died long before.
Seacoasts are vulnerable everywhere, true. Storm surges as from Sandy are the short-term danger. Venice is already endangered, but that’s a special case. People are looking toward solutions, or really alleviations, but those are costly and long-term.
Almost every problem that global heating will cause will hit sooner and be of far larger magnitude than protecting architecture, let alone other artworks. Start solving some of those and the rest will automatically be taken care of.
You’d be surprised. Look at the Fire of 1973. That was caused by old, flammable documents combined with a high July heat. It resulted in the loss of roughly 80-90% of all military records from the 19th century through the Korean War period. An uninmaginably large loss. Many servicemen’s entire service records were gone in an instant. Great military history in general lost to flames.
Or, more recently, high heat caused a fire here in NYC two years ago which wiped out roughly 90% of all family court records from 1954 to 2006, and almost all criminal records from the 19th century through mid 20th century.
I did. Here’s one account. National Personnel Records Center fire. The cause is unknown, but at the time was suspected to be from cigarettes. High heat hindered the firefighters, but the serious damage was because “The entire facility lacked heat or smoke detectors to automatically detect fire or a fire sprinkler system to automatically extinguish fire.” Very much like the recent fire in London.
I don’t believe the records spontaneously combusted because it was hot outside. Something triggered the fire. That’s always a concern, and poor fire controls are a problem that should be addressed. In fact, they were already addressed in 1973 but the building was grandfathered in. Again, though, that has zero to do with global warming.
The OP’s concerns fall into a number of categories usually managed differently.
Archives are among the poorest of poor cousins where government funding is concerned. Disaster management and recovery plans are part of good archive practice, but implementing them costs money, and its hard to monetise public records in such a way that proactive spending seems like a good idea.
Art and cultural works are, as someone said, more mobile and their worth is far more readily argued.
Built heritage and archaeology is most vulnerable. Sea level has been more or less stable for ~8,000 years, so everything we have built or done in relation to the sea will be vulnerable to rises of a metre or so. Remember you add storm surge, erosion and other factors above sea level.
With a relatively small rise we would stand to lose the archaeology of the coastal dwellers of many nations. Maybe less personal than losing granddad’s war service record in a big fire, but just as relevant and just as irreversible.
And human’s relationship with the sea is part of our heritage as well. From the last glacial maximum there was a ~10,000 year period over which sea level rose 100 metres or more. Thats a centimetre per annum. We are looking to outstrip that.