Over the next few decades, tens of millions of people will be driven from their homes. Braving violence and poverty, they'll roam desperately across continents and borders in search of work and shelter. Unlike other refugees, though, their plight won't be blamed simply on the familiar horrors of war or persecution; they'll blame the weather.
If you haven't heard about the rising tide of environmental migrants, that's because throngs of displaced black and brown people don't evoke the same public sympathy as photos of polar bear cubs. The governments of rich industrialized nations will scramble to shut the gates on the desperate hordes with the same self-serving efficiency with which they've long ignored the social, ecological and economic consequences of their prosperity. But both efforts at blissful ignorance will fail, because climate change is forcing society to confront the mounting natural and man-made disasters on the horizon.
In 2010, according to the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, "more than 90 percent of all disasters and 65 percent of associated economic damages were weather and climate related (i.e. high winds, flooding, heavy snowfall, heat waves, droughts, wildfires). In all, 874 weather and climate-related disasters resulted in 68,000 deaths and $99 billion in damages worldwide."
Those numbers look worse on the ground. In rural Bangladesh, where some of South Asia's major riverways converge, rising waters are threatening to swallow vulnerable coastal communities and leave millions without homes. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the sea level need only rise by a few feet to turn a cultivated area of 1,000 kilometers squared into sopping marsh. The frequency and intensity of floods continues to escalate exponentially, pushing young workers into the cities to earn a living and eroding rural communities and their cultures.
While some places soak, others bake. An ongoing drought crisis in East Africa has created massive hunger and aggravated conflict between groups vying for dwindling resources in an increasingly barren terrain. The United Nations estimated that in 2009, conflicts over cattle grazing and water resources led to several hundred deaths.
It's hard to pinpoint climate as a decisive factor in this sort of social upheaval, but the evidence grows more pronounced with each violent storm, ruined harvest and tribal clash: the cumulus of natural calamities makes it harder to live and thus harder to coexist with our neighbors.
On "Democracy Now!", Christian Parenti, author of Tropic of Chaos, described how climate-driven warfare brings the environmental toll of imperialism full circle.
From 1945 to 1990 the U.N. said there were 150 or so armed conflicts that killed 20 million people, displaced 15 million, 16 million were wounded. That all happened in the "global south" in this belt of states. And so now that's where climate change is kicking in and that was also the same terrain where the last 30 years of IMF and World Bank-backed structural adjustment of privatization, deregulation of economies, cutting state support for farmers and fishermen -- that program affected those states most intensely. And now the weather associated with climate change, extreme weather such as the drought, punctuated by flooding in East Africa, is adding to this. And there's this catastrophic convergence.
Grassroots environmental groups have rallied around the concept of "climate debt" to demand justice for the ecological destruction of the Global South. Still, the immediate humanitarian threats posed by climate change reveal the difficulty of thinking long term in the face of intense scarcity.
Trickle-Down Effect
A warming planet is a thirsty one.
Water is one reason why Southern Sudan's new independence could just be a temporary respite in a raging struggle for ecological wealth. The world's youngest nation is at the heart of the Nile River Basin, which supports several economies and ecosystems and fuels toxic tensions among them. Last year, economics professor Paul Sullivan of National Defense University, predicted that without equitable management of precious water, Sudan's partition would merely pave the way for more turmoil:
Water, land, food, energy and development are tightly and importantly interlinked. Water is also very much linked to the potential for peace in the country. The tensions and potentials for peace in Darfur, between the north and the south -- and amongst many other in other regions, including between local tribes and clans -- can be, in part, determined, by the availability, quality, sharing, management and maintenance of water sources in the country.
A recent Senate Foreign Relations Committee report offered similar warnings about Afghanistan and Pakistan, where "water scarcity... triggers human insecurity, which can intensify potentially explosive tensions among neighboring countries or regions." Alarmingly, the report recommended that the U.S. government integrate water management into its occupation of the region, which would expand Washington's control over civilian resources in an arena of unending conflict.
And long before popular uprisings in Egypt, analysts were predicting that climate change would feed into geopolitical instability in the Middle East.
Al Jazeera reports that water shortages could tip Yemen's political turmoil toward full-blown civil war.
Yemen's capital Sanaa, from where president Ali Saleh left the country after he was injured during protests, could effectively run out of water by 2025, hydrology experts say.
Water shortages could cost the unstable country 750,000 jobs, slashing incomes in the poorest Arab country by as much as 25 percent over the next decade....
Commentators frequently blame Yemen's problems on tribal differences, but environmental scarcity may be underpinning secessionist struggles in the country's south and some general communal violence.
One of the perverse intersections between the water and climate crises is a misguided attempt to solve both through the energy industry.
For instance, while hydroelectricity has been touted as a "clean" power source, activists point out that energy-intensive mega-dam projects may actually ruin ecosystems and belch even more carbon into the atmosphere--and strengthen oppressive regimes as well. The government of Burma has used dam construction as a pretext for driving out indigenous groups and crushing political dissent. The military has repeatedly cracked down on isolated minority villages to clear the way for lucrative dam-building projects, which are typically designed to funnel electricity to energy-hungry consumers in China at the expense of Burma's poorest communities.
One 85 year-old who fled to Thailand from his homeland in 2008, whose story was recorded by the Shan Sapawa Environment Organization, couldn't imagine life in exile:
My spirit is here; I am connected to this land.. When the military burned our village and forced us out from our homeland, we still hand the land. If the water floods over, we will have nothing left."
Frustrated by political gridlock in international negotiations on carbon emissions, the climate justice movement sees the link between climate and conflict as a call for broad-based solutions that blend the environmental with the social. That can start with the political enfranchisement of indigenous groups and securing food and water sovereignty for the poor. From there, the people most impacted by climate change can work toward inclusive development to heal the damage and move toward more sustainable energy.
But environmental migrants have a long way to go before they reach justice. Meanwhile, whether displaced by nature's wrath or civil war, the new refugees are running out of places to run.
Cross-posted from Colorlines.com.
Follow Michelle Chen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/meeshellchen
Mindy S. Lubber: Economists Urge Honest Accounting of Carbon's True Costs
Rabbi Lawrence Troster: Ethical Responsibility And Climate Change: We're All In The Same Boat
Kelly Rigg: Moral Outrage Killed a Tabloid, but Can It Save the Climate?
Boyd Cohen: Globally Resilient City Number 9: London
Energy = life and LFTR = Abundant energy.
http://www1.american.edu/ted/ICE/iceall.html
It is clear to me that the world is shrinking exponentially both because of technology in communications and transportation and the ever growing population. We have far surpassed any sort of sustainability in natural resources and as you look around the globe you see that in "successful" industrialized nations problems like depression, obesity, crashing economies, chronic disease, neurotic behavior like serial killing and rampage shootings are on the rise while in the developing world you are seeing more of the same (aids, wars, rebel forces over throwing gov and raping and pillaging) but you are also seeing a desperation of movement and displacement.
its clear that the conventional paradigm of human existence is out dated. the idea of sovereign nations and independence is just going to continue to run us into the ground. now more than ever we need to start seeing more international unions, cooperations and agencies dedicated to dealing with a future that has limited resources, a dying environment, and too many people.
East Africa has always been starving, this is nothing new or related to climate change. It's been a desert for millennia.
If indeed the Earth's atmosphere warms up, there will be more moisture, relative humidity, in the air not less. More rainfall. A cold planet would have much less moisture in the atmosphere. It's simple physics.
Look up Gleissberg Minimum. Coming soon to a continent near you! If you want something climate related to worry about.
There will be wars over water as a resource due to increased demand due to an increasing population. Before technology, it happened constantly. Since the Earth is covered by 70% water, I suggest we figure out a cheap way to desalinate ocean water in large quantities. Solar energy could do it, considering it does it on a daily basis and a huge scale already(rain). We could easily augment the process through simple technology.
*Globally* speaking, that is correct.
As water vapor is a greenhouse gas, more moisture in turn causes more warming. Which in some areas causes droughts.
Simple physics.
juancarnuba: "More rainfall."
In some areas, yes. Which in turn causes flooding.
Simple physics.
HTH.
The author and yourself are stating that more moisture will cause more droughts. Simple physics, I think not. This cannot really be debated in 250 words or less, but think about your statement a little more and consider dew point in a warmer atmosphere. A good place to contemplate this would be the panhandle of Alaska where it's cloudy a lot. Rains a lot too. After about a week of clouds, the ocean and the air are basically the same temperature.
More rainfall in some areas, of course. More floods, probably a given. What about flood control or not living in a flood plain. But, more rainfall in "more" areas that's probably a given too. That would mean less droughts.
Unlike all other greenhouse gases, water vapor is unable to drive multidecadal global warming.
Simple physics.
The "most powerful" greenhouse gas (due to its concentration, not per molecule) in terms of driving multidecadal global warming is CO2.
Simple physics.
I have launched a petition "“Tell Secretary of Agriculture to Subsidize Organic Vegan Farming” . Organic vegan life style is the greenest option for a sustainable living. The green revolution should start from a green diet. Let’s urge Department of Agriculture to facilitate everyone for the final fight against climate change.
If you like to learn more about this petition, please visit https://www.facebook.com/groups/247955191885107?ap=1. To sign the petition, the link is at http://www.change.org/petitions/tom-vilsack-secretary-of-agriculture-usda-subsidize-organic-farming?share_id=QxfsvBiMcm&pe=d2e .
i knew that before actually but living here really brought it home. lot's of boggy, bolder strewn grassland , good for grazing but not anything else.
of course there are other places like this that are not suited for crops but animal husbandry.
meanwhile, living on a vegan diet in a place like this would mean getting all my protein from imports. not good for the environment and potentially deadly. even a little storm can disrupt the traffic between here and england/europe quite a bit.
“Trenberth on Tracking Earth’s energy: A key to climate variability and change” an original article by Kevin Trenberth written for Skeptical Science and posted on July 12 (Australian time).
To access the article, go to:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Tracking_Earths_Energy.html
Actually climate change began over a century ago, when the high rises went up, the asphalt went down, the digging for oil, diamonds and gold started, when men believe that they could cut down the old men and women in the forests and leave their saplings with no help, and when man began to trawl their nets on the bottom of the seas and tear everything out of it.
What gets me is that the earth does not even belong to man. Humans are nothing but dirty squatters. Of all the wonderful things that we could do to our beautiful earth instead we had to ruin it. Humans are getting full payment for their work.
Too much big government - absolutely, just ask Greece.
Warming? - not unless you equate "Earth Temperature" to "just the surface of growing urban areas disproportionately in the northern hemisphere"
Good for him.
Here is how money works. Australia is going to tax anyone who uses coal - vowing to shut coal-fired power quickly forcing a move to cleaner options. Great theory. Pity however the truth in that This summer an Australian company signed a $60 billion contract with a state enterprise, China Power International Development, to supply coal to Chinese power stations beginning in 2013 from a vast complex of mines, called China First, to be built in the Australian outback. So much for saving the planet. Australians will pay extra for everything made in Australia and eventually China will buy Australia like it is already lending money to countries growing broke
In the meantime, there are signs from China that they may be taking climate change more seriously than the West, because of their historical experience of famine, and flood, and the dangers they pose.
A: Because they are science deniers, of course.
The planet is warming - true. The planet is warming again - more truthful.
A recent media picture shows a storekeeper sitting on some steps leading to the ocean outside her place of business. Report details her concern that the sea-level will rise 1 metre and she had fears of impending bankruptcy. - True. However reading on the science allegedly behind the story was that it would rise 1m in 100 years - Modelling, The facts are important and the whole truth is necessary not selected truths.
'it didn't happen'. If you want more, this guy's explanation on the cooling
period is worth reading. http://cliveg.bu.edu/people/kaufmann.html. Other scientists refer to this as puzzling and other are not sure that the reworked modelling is correct either. Open your mind to the whole story.
There hasn't been any warming or any sea rise since 1998.
Another one who isn't bothered with the facts - just happy to repeat the lies of the deniers. 2001-2010 was the hottest decade on record. The average world temperature is now above the record set in 1998, which was duing a particularly severe El Nino weather event.
There are varying estimates of the number of climate refugees, some very much in the 50 million ballpark.