Resettling the First American Climate Refugees

[Autonemesis]

A $48 million federal grant has been allocated

In January, the Department of Housing and Urban Development announced grants totaling $1 billion in 13 states to help communities adapt to climate change, by building stronger levees, dams and drainage systems.

One of those grants, $48 million for Isle de Jean Charles, is something new: the first allocation of federal tax dollars to move an entire community struggling with the impacts of climate change. The divisions the effort has exposed and the logistical and moral dilemmas it has presented point up in microcosm the massive problems the world could face in the coming decades as it confronts a new category of displaced people who have become known as climate refugees.

The Isle de Jean Charles resettlement plan is one of the first programs of its kind in the world, a test of how to respond to climate change in the most dramatic circumstances without tearing communities apart. Under the terms of the federal grant, the island’s residents are to be resettled to drier land and a community that as of now does not exist. All funds have to be spent by 2022.

But even a plan like this — which would move only about 60 people — has been hard to pull off.

$48,000,000 ÷ 60 = $800,000 pp.

“This is not just a simple matter of writing a check and moving happily to a place where they are embraced by their new neighbors,” said Mark Davis, the director of the Tulane Institute on Water Resources Law and Policy.

“If you have a hard time moving dozens of people,” he continued, “it becomes impossible in any kind of organized or fair way to move thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or, if you look at the forecast for South Florida, maybe even millions.”

[osmanthus]

Sounds about right. They'll need to build some infrastructure for them. But they might be able to save money by moving deniers over to Isle de Jean Charles, and moving the refugees into accommodation vacated by the deniers.

[Testycalibrated]

[osmanthus]

Well yes, it will be fun for them down there. But we're unlikely to get 20 metres this century. I think at least 3 metres is likely, but 20 is probably a bit much.

[rednoise]

“If you have a hard time moving dozens of people,” he continued, “it becomes impossible in any kind of organized or fair way to move thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or, if you look at the forecast for South Florida, maybe even millions.”

Imagine what happens when thousands, if not millions, start moving from Saudi Arabia when it becomes uninhabitable in a few decades.

[osmanthus]

Not just Saudi Arabia. Bangladesh is a prime example too. Hot climate already, and extremely low elevation. It, and places like it, as going to get double whammied.

[Testycalibrated]

Well yes, it will be fun for them down there. But we're unlikely to get 20 metres this century. I think at least 3 metres is likely, but 20 is probably a bit much.

i just kinda liked that map.

[osmanthus]

It's a cool map, but a 2 metre storm surge on top of a 3 metre sea level rise will get the bunnies hopping anyway.

[RAFH]

Imagine what happens when thousands, if not millions, start moving from Saudi Arabia when it becomes uninhabitable in a few decades.

Pretty much all of it is uninhabitable now and folks are not moving out in droves.

I'd say a much much bigger issue would be places like Bangladesh, India, lots of China. That's where there's tens of millions of people in very low elevations and generally next to major river deltas.

I do agree, 20m seems a bit much, quite a bit much. Even 3 meters seems pessimistic. My guess, totally without any basis, is about 1 meter. Which will be disastrous enough. Here in the PNW, probably not so bad. Most of the shorelines a steep. Skagit Valley would suffer major inundation and that's a major agricultural area. A lot of beachfront land would be underwater but that's mostly residential and hoity-toity homes so I don't have too much sympathy, plus it might be some work for me. Assuming I am still alive. Nah, I've only got maybe two more decades, if I'm lucky.

[osmanthus]

I'd say a much much bigger issue would be places like Bangladesh, India, lots of China. That's where there's tens of millions of people in very low elevations and generally next to major river deltas.

Yup, and all the coast between Bangladesh and China. Vietnam, for example, will have major problems. They're already being affected.

I do agree, 20m seems a bit much, quite a bit much. Even 3 meters seems pessimistic. My guess, totally without any basis, is about 1 meter.

My basis for saying 3 metres is that the IPCC figures for just about anything are usually very conservative, and they expect up to 1 metre. Hansen is expecting a whole lot more, or at least thinks it possible. So I figure the IPCC is probably wrong, and too low, but with a bit of luck Hansen's upper range will be too high. So on that basis I'd expect somewhere around 3 metres by 2100.

Although obviously this depends on final CO2 levels, etc.

[osmanthus]

Oh and this is just in: Climate-exodus expected in the Middle East and North Africa

The number of climate refugees could increase dramatically in future. Researchers of the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry and the Cyprus Institute in Nicosia have calculated that the Middle East and North Africa could become so hot that human habitability is compromised. The goal of limiting global warming to less than two degrees Celsius, agreed at the recent UN climate summit in Paris, will not be sufficient to prevent this scenario. The temperature during summer in the already very hot Middle East and North Africa will increase more than two times faster compared to the average global warming. This means that during hot days temperatures south of the Mediterranean will reach around 46 degrees Celsius (approximately 114 degrees Fahrenheit) by mid-century. Such extremely hot days will occur five times more often than was the case at the turn of the millennium. In combination with increasing air pollution by windblown desert dust, the environmental conditions could become intolerable and may force people to migrate.

[RAFH]

Not just Saudi Arabia. Bangladesh is a prime example too. Hot climate already, and extremely low elevation. It, and places like it, as going to get double whammied.

Iraq would lose a lot of territory. Iran some. Lot of area in Indonesia that would suffer. Ditto New Guinea. Amazon would lose a lot of land. Texass would get hurt a lot along with much of the Gulf Coast. Bermuda and the Bahamas would pretty much cease to exist. You could kiss off the Tuamotus at least until the reefs built up, if they are able to. Ditto with the Marshalls. The Salton Sea area of SE California would likely flood. As would the Mexican lands in the delta of the Colorado Delta. Probably some parts of the California Delta of the San Juaquin and Sacarmento Rivers. Both of these areas are major agricultural producers. The Salton Sea would go from being 50' deep to about 280' deep. And probably be an extension of the Gulf of California.

[RAFH]

Yup, and all the coast between Bangladesh and China. Vietnam, for example, will have major problems. They're already being affected.

My basis for saying 3 metres is that the IPCC figures for just about anything are usually very conservative, and they expect up to 1 metre. Hansen is expecting a whole lot more, or at least thinks it possible. So I figure the IPCC is probably wrong, and too low, but with a bit of luck Hansen's upper range will be too high. So on that basis I'd expect somewhere around 3 metres by 2100.

Although obviously this depends on final CO2 levels, etc.

I'd say methane is far more serious. Especially with the frozen methane deposits in the North Atlantic that could be dislodged by Greenland ice melting.

Oh, well, I'm going to be on a boat. It rises with the flood.

[RAFH]

Oh and this is just in: Climate-exodus expected in the Middle East and North Africa

I'm figuring most of those people will have migrates already due to ISIS and their ilk.


Another couple of big ones, the Nile Delta and the Niger Delta. The Rio de la Plata in South America.

[osmanthus]

I'd say methane is far more serious. Especially with the frozen methane deposits in the North Atlantic that could be dislodged by Greenland ice melting.

Can't see why very cold fresh water running off Greenland would destabilise benthic clathrates in the North Atlantic. I'm more worried about the (soon-to-be-ex) permafrost.

[Autonemesis]

That's not going to be pretty.

[RAFH]

That's not going to be pretty.

20 meters is highly unlikely in the next 85 years.

But yeah, it's not pretty. Should be frightening as can be. The Central Valley of California along with the Salton Sea area are significant food production regions for the entire nation.

[osmanthus]

20 metres is plausible for the late 22nd century, depending on what transpires before then, but really nobody alive today is thinking that far ahead. The next 50 years are the important ones.

[Mike PSS]

My house in Florida is still safe, and still inland from the shoreline. I think I'm safe from the "flood". It's the zombie apocalypse I have to prepare for now since Hell is filling up so fast.

[Testycalibrated]

No house in Florida is safe. It's Florida.