Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Tuesday, January 22, 2019

How States Ignore Climate Change At Peril Of Coastal Residents

(Photo by White House via Wikimedia Commons)

Climate change-denying Republican governors and state legislatures are ignoring scientific consensus that man-made global warming is a serious threat to millions of coastal residents, and that unregulated development could mean the devastation seen up and down the Jersey shore because of Superstorm Sandy could happen again in other states, unless they start planning for rising sea levels and more frequent and intense storms.

These states are putting business interests ahead of the safety of their citizens living in coastal regions while at the same time putting taxpayers on the hook when the inevitable call is made to FEMA and other agencies for federal disaster relief. The Huffington Post recently reported that New Jersey governor Chris Christie has put businesspeople in place of environmental scientists and coastal management experts at the state’s Department of Environmental Protection. In New Jersey, denial about the extent of flooding and devastation from a storm like Sandy extended from the governor’s home at Drumthwacket to the decision makers at New Jersey Transit, who failed to move 300 rail cars from the floodwaters of Sandy, causing $100 million in damage.

From New Jersey to North Carolina to Florida, here are some quotes from climate change-denying GOP politicians, followed by the scientific predictions regarding rising sea levels and storm surges and how many millions of coastal residents are vulnerable to the flooding and devastation that will be caused by the next Sandy — and the many more to come due to global warming:

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 65

16 responses to “How States Ignore Climate Change At Peril Of Coastal Residents”

  1. You want proof that there is global warming? How about this – my wife picked fresh lettuce from our garden in Connecticut last weekend. How about this – ski resorts in western Massachusetts, southern Vermont and the lower Adriondaks haven’t opened yet because of the temperatures. How about this – look at the snowcap on Mt. Rainier in Washington. It starts noticeably higher than it did 20 years ago.

  2. Anyone who can not see the effects of global warming in the melting of our polar caps, rapidly melting glaciers in Iceland and places like the Andes, and still ignore the long term effects of our decaying ozone layer is not only blind, they are the epitome of irresponsibility.
    At this point it doesn’t matter if the main reason for global warming is a natural phenomena or man-made. The priority at this late stage is to prepare for the inevitable. Coastal regions throughout the world are likely to be underwater by the end of this century, and that includes the USA from Texas to New York. Submerged regions may be the tip of the iceberg compared to the likelihood of huge losses of arable land and shortages of potable water.
    Warfare in the future is not going to be over Sharia law or communism, the motivation will be survival of the species.

  3. howa4x says:

    The tea party has become part of the rackets, where oil people, and development intrests control the agenda against the public intrest. This show the absolute corruption of them as they are just another goup of republicans who want to become rich off the government they claim to hate. Special intrests have poured millions into their coffers and the tea party is doing their bidding. Look at the golden parachutte Dick Armey got from Freedom works a tea party organization. It was 8 million. The tea party has become another cynical group that rails against the government but lines their pockets because of it. The problem is more and more people will live at risk because of this. Whether it’s climte denial or the gutting of FEMA, or removing regulations on gas exploration the tea party is wworking for the 2% and not the 98% they claim to represent.

  4. Don B says:

    It wouldn’t bother me at all if residents and businesses who were devastated by the floods etc. from Sandy were told that they COULD NOT REBUILD in the same spots. That due to increasing uncretainty in weather patterns etc. that they will have to relocate. Insuance companies need to “pay out” the loss of houses and businesses, possibly with some Federal help, and let these people re-locate further inland. If they don’t they should be given to understand that they will have to be “self-insured” to rebuild in the same spot. How many times do they have to get “blown away” or flooded out to get the climate change message?

    • Bill says:

      I agree with your statement for the most part. There is an exception to this, in Breezy Point New York. This area was never designed to be a year round community, it was originally a bungalow community used only in the warm weather months. It has only one 2-lane road and is somewhat isolated from the more established communities like Nesponsit, Belle Harbor and Rockaway Beach. That said it is a beautiful place and I can understand why people decided to live there all of the year.

  5. gargray says:

    The world has changed, why don’t they look around, they are still in their coocoon.

  6. Rex H says:

    I believe the climate is changing. That is a no-brainer. Industrialized mankind is probably a factor since there are close to 7 billion of us, but I don’t believe we are going to be able to do much about it…except to start pulling back from coastal development. The world is going to take a major economic hit. Can we build a seawall around every major coastal city? I don’t think so.
    Real estate boom coming for the Mid West….but stay away from rivers and streams.

  7. Jim Lou says:

    The problem is that there are so-called scientist who proclaim that there isn’t any real evidence of global warming. The Earth is just going through a normal adjustment.

  8. Bob Williams says:

    I know that there is climate change, because it’s colder at night than it is during the day. That is change we can believe in. Case closed.

    • Sand_Cat says:

      Good job, Bob.

      You’ve relieved all the anxieties of millions with your concise, fact-filled, scientific dismissal of the problem.

  9. Sand_Cat says:

    What’s new about Republicans’ putting the safety of their citizens at risk? Isn’t that part of the party platform?

  10. Want to get the GOP on board? Simply deny FEMA, Corps. of Engineers, etc. assistance to rebuild shorefronts in states where they don’t accept climate change.
    Those Con. men may reject science, but they LOVE money.

    • Tom_D44 says:

      Hey Joseph. Last I remembered those agencies, as well as the entire federal government, are all funded with our tax dollars. The dollars from people who agree with you and people who don’t. People who live on the coast and people who don’t. Maybe we should have all the people living in tornado alley move too right? And all the people in the mountain regions who are exposed to the dangers of flash flooding and avalanches? And all those people who live in the earthquake zones? Deny them all if they don’t agree with you right?

      I am not necessarily a global warming skeptic but I don’t see a consensus on the actual cause. Regardless, however, I don’t know what anyone can do about it and where the money will come from to do all that some people want to do. I don’t see countries like China all that enthusiatic about spending their money on the issue and they are a huge contributer to greenhouse gasses. Is the United States expected to save the world again when we are already broke? Oh thats right, we’ll just print all that money too.

  11. onedonewong says:

    I’m still waiting for FEMA to condem all the home sites that were destroyed rather than allow them to rebuild

  12. ralphkr says:

    I can certainly understand why Floridians are global warming naysayers. With very little sea level rise most of the state would be water with a number of islands. Actually, it won’t take much of a storm to be a disaster on most of our coastlines considering our penchant for building expensive homes and resorts on sand bars. We were seriously considering buying a house on the Washington coast a little over a third of a mile from the ocean and then I looked up the history of the Willapa Peninsula and found out that the ocean shoreline had moved West by a little over a mile in a little over a Century so where the house now stood was over a half mile out to sea from the former shoreline and the whole area was just sand dropped there by the ocean.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.