Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/16/2017 12:26:13 AM

Glacier National Park used to have 150 glaciers. Now it has 26.


Glacier National Park is losing its namesake glaciers and new research shows just how quickly: Over the past 50 years, 39 of the park’s glaciers have shrunk dramatically, some by as much as 85 percent.

Of the 150 glaciers that existed it the park in the late 19th century, only 26 remain.

“The trend is consistent, there’s been no reversal,” Daniel Fagre, the U.S. Geological Survey scientist who led the research, said.

Boulder Glacier with visitors in 1932.George Grant/Glacier National Park
The same spot was bare land in 1988. The ice has shrunk so much that Boulder Glacier is no longer considered active.Jerry De Santo/University of Montana image 642.001

The loss of glaciers potentially affects not just tourism to the park, which hit a record 2.9 million visitors last year, but also local ecosystems that depend on the summer release of glacial meltwater.

The pristine, 1 million–acre park sits along the border with Canada in Montana and has long been a poster child for climate change in U.S. national parks. Side-by-side photo comparisons show in the starkest terms just how far some glaciers have retreated, with some only reduced to small nubs of ice.

The retreat has happened as temperatures in the region have risen by 1.5 degrees F since 1895 as heat-trapping greenhouse gases have continued to accumulate in the atmosphere.

A 2014 study found that it is this human-caused warming that accounts for the bulk of worldwide glacier loss over the past few decades.

The glaciers of Glacier National Park have been particularly vulnerable because overall, they are smaller and don’t extend as high up as in other areas. Because of this and the relatively rapid warming, “we’re sort of on the leading edge of glacier retreat that’s occurring all over the world,” Fagre said.

Fagre and his colleagues used digital maps made from aerial photos and satellite observations to chart the ever-shrinking perimeters of the glaciers, comparing glacier areas in 1966, 1998, 2005, and 2015–2016.

The rates of decline vary from glacier to glacier; some are at relatively higher elevations and shaded by nearby mountains. On average, the glaciers in the park have shrunk by 39 percent since 1966.

How quickly the remaining glaciers might go is hard to predict, as relatively cool years can afford a small reprieve, but hot years can push glaciers already on the brink below the 25-acre threshold used to define a glacier.

The perimeter of Sperry Glacier in Glacier National Park in 1966, 1998, 2005, and 2015.U.S. Geological Survey

“The most important aspect of this is that the process is only going in one direction,” Fagre said. “They’re all inexorably going to that ultimate fate.”

The newly released data is part of an ongoing USGS effort to monitor glacier change in Montana, Alaska, and Washington.

Understanding how glaciers are changing is important because they play a key role in local ecosystems. Summer meltwater helps top up streams that might otherwise run dry and many species are highly adapted to the cold temperatures of the water, Fagre said.

The subject of national parks and monuments has recently become a contentious one, with the Trump administration recently ordering the Interior Department to review all large national monuments to recommend ways to shrink or abolish them. The order is part of a larger effort by the administration to open up fossil fuel development on federal lands.

During his confirmation hearing, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke cited his personal observations of the retreat of Glacier National Park’s Grinnell Glacier as evidence that the climate was changing, but he hedged on whether humans were the reason for that change and has advocated for U.S. fossil fuels.

Scientists and advocates have warned, though, that such development will only continue to fuel the warming that is driving Glacier National Park’s glaciers to extinction.


(GRIST)


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/16/2017 12:50:29 AM

Report: U.S., British Forces Enter Southern Syria Alongside Terrorists; Is A Bigger Battle Shaping Up?

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/16/2017 10:55:39 AM


REUTERS/Carlos Barria

The media is failing to challenge Trump’s attack on the planet

This story was originally published by the New Republic and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

It may seem like a distant memory now, given President Donald Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey, but the top political news at the beginning of this week was the administration’s unexpected dismissal of nine government scientists from the 18-member Environmental Protection Agency board that oversees the department’s scientific research. The EPA reportedly plans to replace some of those board members with representatives from the polluting industries the agency is supposed to regulate.

This was just the latest brazen assault on climate policy by the Trump administration. By sheer number of actions, Trump has done more on the environment than in any other area since becoming president. He’s signed at least eight anti-environmental executive actions, and ordered delays and reviewsof anti-pollution rules. He’s appointed climate change deniers to cabinet positions, and scrubbed scientifically accurate information about climate change from EPA websites. And Trump is considering whether to leave the Paris climate agreement, which is casting a dark shadow over talks in Bonn, Germany, where representatives from 200 countries are discussing the terms of the deal.

Which makes it all the more bewildering that reporters with access to the president have failed to press him on the subject. Two more examples of this media failure surfaced on Thursday, when The Economist and Time each published separate, wide-ranging interviews with Trump — and neither featured a single question about the administration’s environmental agenda.

Time and The Economist’s omissions might seem reasonable, given the looming threat of a constitutional crisis. But both interviews were conducted before Trump fired Comey; while The Economist sat down with Trump on May 4, Time did so on Monday night, when the fired EPA scientists was major news. These omissions might also seem reasonable by journalistic standards; reporters get a limited amount of time with the president, and can’t ask about everything. But being a good journalist means asking questions that haven’t been asked before, and most journalists have failed to ask Trump about his science and environmental policy since he took office in January.

Here is a rough, and likely incomplete, list of sit-down interviews with Trump since he took office. The numbers indicate how many questions were asked about his environmental agenda.

The questions that were asked were woefully non-substantive. In Fox News’ Jan. 26 interview, Sean Hannity asked, “How important a goal is it that you want this country to move towards energy independence?” Trump responded: “Very important. It’s very important.” Then he insisted, “I’m an environmentalist, OK?”

HANNITY: … many of whom do not like us. We have more shale. We have new technology. We have hydro-fracking natural gas. We’re the Middle East of natural gas. How important a goal is it that you want this country to move towards energy independence?

TRUMP: Very important. It’s very important.

HANNITY: Can you do it in four years?

TRUMP: Oh, I think you can do it in a lot less than that. No, it’s very important. No, they stop you environmentally. They use the environment to stop a lot of good things, not only energy, buildings and factories, plants. They use it to stop things. It’s like a roadblock, but that’s not going to happen anymore.

And, by the way, I’m an environmentalist, OK? I believe strongly in the environment and I’m going to protect the environment. But you don’t have to have a man who wants to build a factory or a person or a company wait 10 years going through approvals, at the end of the 10-year, get rejected, OK?

Climate change was the final question in the Washington Post’s lengthy interview, and Trump was asked not about policy but whether he accepts climate science. “Is there human-caused climate change?” Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt asked. Trump said he believes in “weather.” Editorial writer Stephen Stromberg followed up by asking if Trump should consider the risk; Trump responded that nuclear weapons were a bigger risk. End of interview.

HIATT: Last one: You think climate change is a real thing? Is there human-caused climate change?

TRUMP: I think there’s a change in weather. I am not a great believer in man-made climate change. I’m not a great believer. There is certainly a change in weather that goes — if you look, they had global cooling in the 1920s and now they have global warming, although now they don’t know if they have global warming. They call it all sorts of different things; now they’re using “extreme weather” I guess more than any other phrase. I am not — I know it hurts me with this room, and I know it’s probably a killer with this room — but I am not a believer. Perhaps there’s a minor effect, but I’m not a big believer in man-made climate change.

STROMBERG: Don’t good businessmen hedge against risks, not ignore them?

TRUMP: Well, I just think we have much bigger risks. I mean I think we have militarily tremendous risks. I think we’re in tremendous peril. I think our biggest form of climate change we should worry about is nuclear weapons. The biggest risk to the world, to me — I know President Obama thought it was climate change — to me the biggest risk is nuclear weapons. That’s — that is climate change. That is a disaster, and we don’t even know where the nuclear weapons are right now. We don’t know who has them. We don’t know who’s trying to get them. The biggest risk for this world and this country is nuclear weapons, the power of nuclear weapons.

RYAN: Thank you for joining us.

There’s no shortage of environmental questions to pose to Trump. Here’s what I’d ask him, if given the chance:

  • “President Trump, you ordered the EPA to roll back regulations on coal, claiming this will save the coal industry. But even coal industry executives admit the industry isn’t coming back, so why do you keep insisting it will? What evidence do you have for these claims?”
  • “You promised on the campaign trail to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, but now you’re waffling. If you remain in the agreement, how will you explain the decision to your voters? And if you withdraw, how would you explain the decision to America’s allies?”
  • “The EPA fired half of its Board of Counselors, and removed accurate climate science information from the agency’s website. Are you downgrading science in government policy in favor of corporate influence? Isn’t that contrary to your campaign promises?”
  • “You recently signed an executive order rescinding a requirement to include climate change in environmental reviews of large projects, and you’re scaling back programs that link climate change to national security. And yet, hundreds of large U.S. companies believe climate change is a risk to the U.S. economy. You’re a businessman. What would you tell them?”
  • “Sea levels have risen in the U.S., and one of your own government agencies recently reported that the U.S. is extremely vulnerable to further rises within the next century. How are you going to address this problem?”

What journalists shouldn’t do is — as the Post did — ask Trump whether climate change is real. We already know his answer to that question.

The media’s neglect of environmental policy is hardly unique to the Trump presidency.

In 2014, for example, major media outlets like the New York Times and NPR cut their environment reporting staff significantly. Network news largely ignoredthe U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s wide-ranging report on the state of climate science. And CNN President Jeff Zucker admitted his network didn’t broadcast lots of climate stories because of a “tremendous amount of lack of interest.”

As 2016 proved, political journalists just don’t like asking about it. According to Grist, “Five minutes and 27 seconds were spent on climate change and other environmental issues in the three presidential debates, 2 percent of the total time — and that was pretty much all Hillary Clinton talking.” In addition, “there wasn’t a single question on climate policy, and only one that directly related to energy.”

Climate change is, admittedly, a difficult story to cover. The impacts of global warming can seem opaque and far off. A majority of Americans are concernedabout the crisis, but it’s an ever-present one, and thus not likely to lead the news most days. Plus, the science of climate change is complicated, making it difficult for non-expert journalists to digest, fact-check, and explain to readers — on a deadline, no less. But such difficulties are no excuse for political journalists, who manage to ask Trump informed questions about other complicated subjects, like health care or tax reform.

In the coming weeks, Trump will decide whether to withdraw the U.S. from theParis Agreement. He’ll begin the process of opening up oil drilling in the Atlantic Ocean. And his EPA will start the process of repealing and replacing clean water regulations. If there were ever a time for journalists to force Trump to defend his assault on the environment, it’s now.

(GRIST)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/16/2017 11:12:00 AM



Eileen DeDomenicis stands outside her home as floods hit Atlantic City. Ted Blanco/Climate Central

As New Jersey’s flooding crisis intensifies, low-income people feel the worst impacts



Coastal communities are enduring growing flood risks from rising seas, with places like Atlantic City, sandwiched between a bay and the ocean, facing some of the greatest threats. Guided by new research by Climate Central’s Scott Kulp and Benjamin Strauss, reporter John Upton and photographer Ted Blanco chronicled the plight of this city’s residents as they struggle to deal with the impacts. Upton spent months investigating how the city is adapting, revealing vast inequity between the rich and the poor.

A driver plowed a sedan forcefully up Arizona Avenue, which had flooded to knee height during a winter storm as high tide approached. The wake from the passing Honda buffeted low brick fences lining the tidy homes of working-class residents of this failing casino city, pushing floodwaters into Eileen DeDomenicis’s living room.

“It wasn’t bad when we first moved in here — the flooding wasn’t bad,” DeDomenicis said on a stormy morning in March, after helping her husband put furniture on blocks. She counted down until the tide would start to ebb, using a yardstick to measure the height of floodwaters climbing her patio stairs. She was tracking how many more inches it would take to inundate the ground floor. “When somebody comes by in a car, it splashes up. It hits the door.”

DeDomenicis has lived in this house since 1982, a few hundred feet from a bay. She used to work as a restaurant server; now she’s a school crossing guard. Her husband walked a mile to his job at Bally’s Casino until he retired in January. They’ve seen floods worsen as the seas have risen, as the land beneath them has sunk, and as local infrastructure has rotted away. “It comes in the front door, the back door, and then from the bottom of the house, in through the sides,” DeDomenicis said. “You watch it come in and it meets in the middle of the house — and there’s nothing you can do.”

Two miles east of Arizona Avenue, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is spending tens of millions of dollars building a seawall to reduce storm surge and flooding risks for Atlantic City’s downtown and its towering casinos, five of which have closed in the past four years. A few miles in the other direction, it’s preparing to spend tens of millions more on sand dunes to protect million-dollar oceanfront homes.

But the federal government has done little to protect the residents of Arizona Avenue, or the millions of other working class and poor Americans who live near bays up and down the East Coast, from a worsening flooding crisis. Seas are rising as pollution from fossil fuel burning, forest losses, and farming fuels global warming, melting ice, and expanding ocean water. With municipal budgets stretched thin, lower-income neighborhoods built on low-lying land are enduring some of the worst impacts.

Climate Central scientists analyzed hundreds of coastal American cities and, in 90 of them, projected rapid escalation in the number of roads and homes facing routine inundation. The flooding can destroy vehicles, damage homes, block roads and freeways, hamper emergency operations, foster disease spread by mosquitoes, and cause profound inconveniences for coastal communities.

Atlantic City is among those facing the greatest risks, yet much of the high-value property that the Army Corps is working to protect was built on a higher elevation and faces less frequent flooding than neighborhoods occupied by working class and unemployed residents — an increasing number of whom are living in poverty.

Low walls called bulkheads built along Atlantic City’s shores to block floods have washed away, or were never built in the first place. Flap valves in aging storm drains have stopped working, allowing water to flow backward from the bay into the street when tides are high. At high tide, stormwater pools in Arizona Avenue, unable to drain to the bay. The flooding is getting worse because seas have been rising along the mid-Atlantic coast faster than in most other regions, and the land here is sinking because of groundwater pumping and natural processes. High tides in Atlantic City reach more than a foot higher than they did a century ago, and sea-level rise is accelerating.

New Jersey has done little to address the problem, aside from administering federal grants that have helped a limited number of residents abandon or elevate vulnerable houses. “We expect each town to focus on planning and budgeting for mitigating flooding,” said New Jersey Department of Environmental Protectionspokesperson Bob Considine. Atlantic City can nary afford the kinds of capital improvements needed to provide meaningful relief.

The Army Corps last year began a study of bay flooding in a sweeping stretch of New Jersey covering Atlantic City and 88 other municipalities, home to an estimated 700,000. The study was authorized by Congress in 1987, but it wasn’t kickstarted until federal research identified widespread risks following Superstorm Sandy.

The bay flooding study is “fairly early in the process,” said Joseph Forcina, a senior Army Corps official who is overseeing more than $4 billion worth of post-Sandy recovery work by the agency, including construction of a $34 million seawall in downtown Atlantic City and tens of millions of dollars worth of sand dune construction and replenishment nearby. The study is expected to take more than two years. “We really are in the data-gathering mode.”

The study will help the agency propose a plan, which Congress could consider funding, to ease flood risks when high tides and storms push seawater from bays into streets and homes. It will consider the effects of sea-level rise, but it won’t directly address flooding from poor drainage of rainwater, meaning any fixes spurred by the study are likely to be partial at best. “The Corps is not the agency that deals with interior drainage,” Forcina said. “That’s a local responsibility.”

Floods are driving up insurance rates, while routinely causing property damage and inconveniences. Federal flood insurance promotes coastal living in high-risk areas, and the program is more than $20 billion in arrears following Hurricane Katrina and Sandy. Arizona Avenue residents received Federal Emergency Management Agency letters in March warning of insurance rate increases ahead of 5 to 18 percent a year, which “makes us want to leave even more,” said Tom Gitto.

Raising three children on Arizona Avenue, Gitto and his wife have been unemployed since the closure last year of Trump Taj Mahal, where they worked. He said the flooding has become unbearable but property prices are so low that they feel trapped. Two houses on Arizona Avenue recently sold for less than $35,000. Gitto paid a similar price for his fixer-upper in the 1990s, then spent more than the purchase price on renovations. Flood insurance provided $36,000 for another refurbishment after Sandy ravaged their home.

Flooding strikes the Jersey Shore so often now that the National Weather Service’s office in Mount Holly, New Jersey, raised the threshold at which it issues flood advisories by more than three inches in 2012 “to avoid creating warning fatigue,” flooding program manager Dean Iovino said. Such advisories were being issued nearly every month in Atlantic City before the policy change, up from an average of four months a year in the 1980s.

One out of 10 of the 20,000 homes in Atlantic City are at elevations that put them at risk of flooding each year on average, Climate Central found, though some are protected by bulkheads and other infrastructure that help keep floods at bay. The research was published Wednesday in the journal Climatic Change.

The proportion of the city’s streets and homes affected by flooding is projected to quickly rise. Within about 30 years — the typical life of a mortgage — one out of three homes in Atlantic City could be inundated in a typical year. That would be the case even if aggressive efforts to slow climate change are put in place, such as a rapid global switch from fossil fuels to clean energy.

The worsening woes aren’t confined to Atlantic City, though risks here are among the greatest in America. Neighborhoods near bays can experience rapid increases in the number of streets and homes exposed to regular floods, with small additional sea level capable of reaching far into flat cityscapes and suburbs.

Elsewhere at the Jersey Shore, in Ocean City, New Jersey, the analysis showed one out of five homes are built on land expected to flood in typical years, a figure that could rise to nearly half by 2050. Other cities facing rapid increases in risks include San Mateo along San Francisco Bay in Silicon Valley, the lumber town of Aberdeen at Grays Harbor in Washington state, and Poquoson, Virginia, which has a population of 12,000 and juts into the Chesapeake Bay.

The greenhouse gas pollution that’s already been pumped into the atmosphere makes it too late to prevent coastal flooding from getting worse. It’s simply a matter of how much worse.

The benefits of acting now to slow the effects of warming later would become clearest in the second half of this century. In Atlantic City, if global pollution trends continue and defenses are not improved, 80 percent of current homes risk being inundated in typical years by the end of the century, the analysis showed. By contrast, if greenhouse gas pollution is aggressively reduced almost immediately, the number of homes expected to be exposed to that risk in 2100 would fall to 60 percent.

As efforts to protect the climate flounder in the U.S. and elsewhere, unleashing higher temperatures and seas, communities like the DeDomenicises’ have three basic options for adapting. They can defend against floods with infrastructure that keeps tidal waters at bay, such as bulkheads, pumps, and marsh and dune restorations. They can accommodate the water using measures such as elevating existing houses and building new ones on stilts. And they can relocate altogether, an option that’s expected to lead to mass migrations inland during the decades ahead.

Modeling by University of Georgia demographer Mathew Hauer projects 250,000 being forced by rising seas from New Jersey by century’s end if pollution levels remain high, with nearly 1.5 million refugees fleeing to Texas from U.S. coasts elsewhere. And from Florida — the poster child for sea-level dangers in the U.S. — 2.5 million may be driven to other states.

All three strategies are being pursued to some extent in Atlantic City. All of them are expensive, limiting the options available for a city in decline. “Cities boom and bust,” said Benjamin Strauss, coauthor of the new study and vice president for sea level and climate impacts at Climate Central, which researches and reports on climate change. “Neighborhoods can thrive, and fall into decay. Those are, to some extent, natural cycles of economic life. But now, superimposed onto that for Atlantic City at just the wrong time is this awful existential sea-level threat.”

The Army Corps is building a seawall to protect downtown Atlantic City from floods caused by storm surges.Ted Blanco/Climate Central

Barrier islands like Absecon Island, upon which Atlantic City grew as a gaming and vacation mecca, line the East Coast, from New York to Florida, natural features associated with the coastline’s wide continental shelf and shallow waters. Until barrier islands were developed and armored with seawalls, roads, and building foundations, low-lying shores facing the mainland could keep up with rising seas. Wind and waves washed sand and mud over growing marshes, helping to build up the land. Now, a century of development has locked down the shape and position of the islands, blocking natural processes.

“It’s a huge problem for the U.S.,” said Benjamin Horton, a professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey, which is a global leader in researching sea rise. “These barrier islands are important for so many things — important for housing, important for the economy. They’re important for a variety of industries. They’re especially important for ecosystems. And the barriers protect the mainland from hurricanes; they’re a first line of defense. You lose the barrier islands and where do you think the big waves are going to hit?”

As barrier islands and mainland coastlines were developed, wealthy neighborhoods clustered near ocean shores, where the elevations tend to be higher — which reduces flood risks — and where views are considered the best. Lower-income neighborhoods and industrial zones grew over former marshlands near bays and rivers, where swampy smells are strongest and where flooding occurs most frequently.

That divide between rich and poor is clearly on display on Absecon Island, where stately houses built on higher land facing the ocean are often occupied only during summer — when risks of storms are lowest. The vacation homes and downtown Atlantic City casinos will be protected from storm surges by a new seawall and sand dunes built by the Army Corps, despite lawsuits filed by homeowners angry that dunes will block ocean views.

Poorer neighborhoods are exemplified by Arizona Avenue, a block-long street between a bay and a minor thoroughfare. Bricks in fences and walls are stained by floodwaters and decaying beneath the effects of wakes from passing cars. The century-old, two-story houses have concrete patios and little landscaping — plants are hard to grow in the flood-prone conditions.

During high tides that accompany new and full moons, the street can flood on sunny days. Rubber trash cans can be buoyant in floodwaters, tip over and foul the street with spoiled food and bathroom waste, which residents sweep away after floods recede. Cars are frequently destroyed. Many of the houses along Arizona Avenue had to be stripped and renovated after Sandy filled them with floodwaters and coated walls and ceilings with mold.

The winter storm that inundated Arizona Avenue in March was a typical one for the region. The nor’easter struck during a full moon, meaning it coincided with some of the highest tides of the month. Floodwaters stopped rising a few inches beneath the DeDomenicises’ front door. Emergency crews patrolled in vehicles built to withstand high water. These kinds of floods are called “nuisance floods”by experts.

Nuisance floods are becoming routine features of coastal living around America, and their impacts are difficult to assess. Washington and other major cities could experience an average of one flood caused by tides and storm surges every three days within 30 years, according to a study published by researchers with the nonprofit Union of Concerned Scientists in the journal PLOS One in February. Rain and snow that fall during storms increase flood risks.

Residents of Arizona Avenue describe anxiety when tides and storms bring floods, especially if they aren’t home to help protect their possessions. The rising floodwaters can be emotional triggers — reminders of the upheaving effects of floods wrought by major storms like Sandy in late 2012 and Winter Storm Jonas in early 2016. Some of the residents have spent months living in hotels while their homes were repaired following storms. One of Tom Gitto’s children was born while the family was living in a hotel room paid for by the federal government after Sandy.

Susan Clayton, a psychology and environmental studies professor who researches psychological responses to climate change at the College of Wooster, a liberal arts college in Ohio, said such triggers can lead to sleeping difficulties, “profound anxiety” and other symptoms. The frequent risk of flooding may also make people constantly fear for their homes and for the security their homes provide.

“It tends to be very important to everybody that they have some place that they feel they can relax, where they can be in control,” Clayton said. “Your home is your castle. When your home is threatened, that can really undermine a sense of stability and security. It’s not just the flooding, it’s the idea that it’s your home itself that’s being threatened.”

The economic impacts of nuisance floods can also be far-reaching — researchers say they’re more impactful than most government officials assume. “Since they don’t get a lot of attention, we don’t have a data record of nuisance flooding costs,” said Amir AghaKouchak, a University of California, Irvine, scientist who studies hydrology and climatology.

Cars and vans can create wakes when they’re driven through floods in Atlantic City’s bay neighborhoods.Ted Blanco/Climate Central

AghaKouchak led a study published in the journal Earth’s Future in February that attempted to quantify the economic impacts in large coastal cities. The researchers were hamstrung by the dearth of data. Their preliminary findings, however, suggested that the cumulative economic impacts of nuisance floods might already exceed those of occasional disaster floods in some areas.

“There’s a lot of cost associated with this minor event,” AghaKouchak said. “Cities and counties have to send out people with trucks, pumps and so forth, they have to close down streets, build temporary berms.”

On Arizona Avenue, residents say they feel abandoned by all levels of government. Like an Appalachian coal town, many here depend upon a single industry — an entertainment sector that’s in decline, anchored by casinos that draw visitors to hotels, arcades, restaurants, gas stations and strip clubs.

“They forget about us,” said Christopher Macaluso, a 30-year-old poker dealer who owns a house on Arizona Avenue and grew up nearby. “We’re the city. If they didn’t have the dealers, the dishwashers, the valet guys, the cooks and the housemaids, what have you got? We definitely feel left out.”

With casinos operating in nearby Pennsylvania and elsewhere following the lifting of gambling bans, the flow of visitors to Atlantic City has slowed over a decade from a gush to a trickle. Some towering casino buildings stand abandoned, like empty storefronts in a dying downtown. Others are filled well below capacity with gamers and vacationers; their gaudy interiors faded and gloomy.

One out of every six jobs in Atlantic City was lost between 2010 and 2016 as nearly 5 percent of the population left, according to the latest regional economic report by New Jersey’s Stockton University, which is building a campus in the city. The number of Atlantic City residents using food stamps rose to 15 percent in 2015, and more than one out of every five children here is now officially living in poverty.

President Trump’s construction of two ill-fated casinos in a saturated industry intensified the Atlantic City gaming bubble that began its spectacular burst a decade ago. (As president, Trump is dismantling regulations designed to slow sea rise and other effects of warming.) The city is so broke that its government operations are being overseen by New Jersey.

Flooding in Fairmount Avenue near Arizona Avenue at high tide during a storm.Ted Blanco/Climate Central

“From the moment they started pulling handles in Pennsylvania, the cash that was pouring into slot machines in Atlantic City started to fall,” said Stockton University’s Oliver Cooke, who compares the city’s economic plight to that of Detroit. “As the economy melted down and the land valuations in the city headed south, the tax base just completely melted away.”

Unable to pay for far-reaching measures taken by wealthier waterfront regions,like road-raising in Miami Beach and sweeping marsh restorations in the San Francisco Bay Area, Atlantic City has taken only modest steps to ease flooding.

Using funds from a bond sale and state and federal grants, the city has been refurbishing sluice gates in a canal that were built to control floodwaters but haven’t worked in more than half a century. It plans to replace flap valves in two stormwater drains near Arizona Avenue for $16,000 apiece. “We’re treating that money like gold,” said Elizabeth Terenik, who was Atlantic City’s planning director until last month, when she left its shrinking workforce for a job with a flood-prone township nearby.

That’s far shy of the tens of millions of dollars being spent just blocks away. The Army Corps is using Sandy recovery money to alleviate hazards in wealthier parts of the city and elsewhere on Absecon Island and in New York and other nearby states, while flooding affecting low-income residents of Arizona Avenue and similar neighborhoods is overlooked.

“The Corps does not say, ‘Here’s a problem, and we’re going to fix it’ — somebody has to ask them to help,” said Gerald Galloway, a University of Maryland engineering professor and former Army Corps official. “It depends on a very solid citizen push to get it done. The Corps of Engineers has a backlog of construction awaiting money. You need very strong organizations competing for it.”

Coastal New Jersey’s working class have little power in Washington and their cities manage modest budgets. The divide in Atlantic City reflects a grand injustice of global warming — one that’s familiar to Pacific nations facing obliteration from rising seas, and to Alaskan tribes settled by the government on shrinking coasts. While the wealthy may be able to adapt to the effects of climate change, the poor oftentimes cannot.

“In some cases, the most vulnerable populations will not be able to move,” saidMiyuki Hino, a Stanford PhD candidate who has studied coastal resettlementsaround the world. “In other cases, they’ll be forced to.”

(GRIST)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/16/2017 5:34:37 PM

YES!/Jennifer Luxton

In Detroit, people know what it’s like to live without running water

Each day, Catherine Caldwell hauls three gallons of bottled water to her bathroom and two to her kitchen. She and her family use the water for flushing the toilet, washing hands, and — after heating it on the stove — cleaning dishes and cooking. For bathing, they head to her mother-in-law’s house a few blocks away.

The 44-year-old Caldwell, her husband, and two young grandchildren have been living without running water in their Detroit home for over four months. Every two weeks, they receive a delivery of water from a local nonprofit, We the People of Detroit. It’s the second time they’ve been without water services in the three years they’ve lived at the current residence. The short of it is this: They can’t afford to pay the bill, and the water company shut off their water.

YES!/Jennifer Luxton

Stories like Caldwell’s are common in Detroit. The city has a 40 percent poverty rate, and residents have seen water bills double over the past 10 years. But more often now, it’s not just Detroit; stories of people living without water are coming from other cities — Toledo, Ohio; Baltimore; and Houston. In Philadelphia, 4 out of 10 water accounts are past due. Two years ago, a survey of 30 major U.S. cities found that water bills rose by 41 percent between 2010 and 2015. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the average American family of four uses about 400 gallons of water a day, and that households should expect to pay 4.5 percent of their income on water.

As water poverty increases, cities have to decide what to do when people can’t pay their bills.

A recent study predicts that in the next five years, more than one-third of Americans will not be able to afford their water. The authors, Michigan State University professors Elizabeth A. Mack and Sarah Wrase, warned that the days of affordable water are coming to an end for most communities, from rural to urban.

YES!/Jennifer Luxton

Different cities deal with different water issues. Decaying infrastructure contaminates or leaks water. Climate change conditions make water more scarce. Conservation and efficient technologies mean less demand for water. Each of these factors drives up the rate. And then there’s this: When low-income families can’t afford their bills, cities raise rates even more to cover losses. (That puts middle-income people at risk for unaffordable water bills, too.)

“The percentage of U.S. households who will find water bills unaffordable could triple from 11.9 percent to 35.6 percent,” the study says.

In Detroit, where 50,000 households have lost water access since 2014, the water authority shuts off the water for residents who can’t pay. This is one reason the city finds itself at the leading edge of policymaking on water affordability. To prepare for what everyone will face within five years, the nation’s cities need only to look at Detroit.

YES!/Jennifer Luxton

Today, between 10,000 and 20,000 homes in Detroit are without water.

Detroit lawyers joined with other lawyers around the country to fight the mass shutoffs three years ago, and the coalition is now working on a national water rights policy. The “Civil Rights Bill for Water” would guarantee that no one goes without running water, regardless of their financial status.

Civil rights attorney Alice Jennings worked on a class action lawsuit in 2014 that managed to stop the shutoffs for about five weeks. They won some concessions, like more notice before a shutoff and more flexible payment arrangements. But it’s simply not enough, Jennings says, who’s based in Detroit.

“We’re looking for something that’s completely different,” she says.

The Civil Rights Bill for Water states the cost of water should be based upon a person’s ability to pay. It also stipulates a protected class: families with young children, senior citizens, and the disabled. No matter what, their water cannot be interrupted.

YES!/Jennifer Luxton

The proposal for the national policy will be submitted to Rep. John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat, in mid-April, Jennings says, but the group is realistic about its chances. “We do understand that we’re dealing right now in a political climate where this is not going to necessarily be passed this year or next year, or even five years from now,” she says. “I’m reminded of congressperson Conyers, who reintroduced the Martin Luther King Bill for 15 years straight before Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday was declared [a national holiday].”

Jennings knows it may require a generational process of informing and educating to work out a viable policy, one that requires all 50 states to provide access to clean water for all residents, regardless of ability to pay.

Meanwhile, thousands of Detroiters are faced with monthly bills that can often be half their income, and people like Caldwell live in homes without running water.

The Michigan Legislature is looking at a new Michigan Water Is a Human Right bill package introduced in March. Until there’s a solution, community organizations like We the People have stepped in. Besides lobbying Detroit officials to adopt a water affordability plan, they supply water stations throughout neighborhoods, deliver water to homes, and staff hotlines for those with emergencies. They help residents negotiate with the water authority for payment arrangements. Some members have gone as far as paying a bill or two to prevent families from having children taken away by Child Protective Services because of unsanitary living conditions. They even support civil disobedience actions to obstruct shutoffs.

YES!/Jennifer Luxton

Caldwell takes care of two small grandchildren and relies on her husband’s modest income to pay the bills. After purchasing her house, she found out there was a delinquent water bill of $2,326.84. During the process to dispute the bill, her water was shut off. It’s been restored recently as she waits to find out whether she qualifies for a payment assistance program. If not, they’ll turn it off again.

Being without water can feel like a desperate situation.

When earlier attempts to get it turned back on failed, she took matters into her own hands, the way many Detroiters in her position have. She went to the hardware store, bought a special key, and just turned the water back on herself. It’s a felony charge with up to five years in prison. “I’m not gonna lie. I turned it on myself,” Caldwell confesses. “I can go to jail for that, I know that, but I got grandkids in here.”

YES!/Jennifer Luxton


(GRIST)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1