Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999
Nobody disputes Irma is a massive and very damaging storm if it hits Florida, but those sustained wind speeds are matched by Hurricane Wilma (2005), Hurricane Gilbert (1988) and the 1935 Labor Day Hurricane. All of these currently trail the maximum sustained wind speed of Hurricane Allen (1980) and Irma's central pressure is unusually higher than the earlier hurricanes.
The only context free claims are the ones that blames every modestly unusual weather incident on climate change.
|
I think the trouble with this is that with higher sea levels in general, any time an average storm blows through, it will push a greater volume of water inland, causing damage that would normally be associated with a stronger storm. The strength or frequencies of storms don't need to increase to increase risk/consequence of storms provided sea levels are higher (and they are).
One would think that investment into infrastructure that helps mitigate such effects would be getting seriously talked about, or other adaptive measures that cost nothing like dissuading developing in swamps and drainage areas for example.
The effects that our industry have had are cumulative and enduring, they're not slowing down, and the solutions that have been thrown at "prevention" are ineffectual and have been totally hijacked by political rhetoric rather than leading to meaningful discourse and action. Much like this thread.
How do we provide energy and food for 1 - 1.5 billion people living in energy poverty TODAY? Same question for another 1 billion people arriving in the next 15 - 20 years? How do we ensure our societies make decisions based on BIOPHYSICAL REALITY as opposed to theoretical social science?