Great Lakes city investing / play on global warming

[Andrew M.]

Ok here's my theory and could use some advise from the locals.  I am looking to do some buy and hold real estate investing and want to make a "play on global warming"...my research shows that the southwest through California (where I live) will be dealing with increased drought conditions and other adverse affects from global warming out 15-20 years and beyond.  Conversely, areas like Buffalo, Cleveland, Detroit, Milwaukee, etc. might actually see benefits (relative to other parts of the country) as its weather warms a bit and fresh water sources in the US become more scarce.

So since I am going to be investing anyways (and already have 2 places in California), I'm thinking maybe to diversify, I could invest in a place that will cash flow now and that 20-30 years out may become far more attractive than it is now and a place that my wife and I and/or our kids can have paid for and ready if it becomes the new more attractive place to live down the road...

All that said, does this theory make sense, and more importantly, what city would you recommend as best to invest in (criteria being that its a decent or up and coming place to live in now but could become much more later). 

Ideally I'm looking for a place on/near the shore of one of the Great Lakes...I've seen some nice high-rise condo's in West Cleveland with views out to the lake that looks interesting. 

[Richard C.]

Worst case scenario that I have seen says a 4 degree celsius increase over the next 100 years.  That's about 7 degrees F, absolute worst case.  I don't think that is likely to turn Cleveland into a beach vacation spot.