Remains of some 100 homes burned down in New York during the storm |
By Nicholas D. Kristof, The New York Times, October 31, 2012
President Obama and
Mitt Romney seemed determined not to discuss climate change in this campaign.
So thanks to Hurricane Sandy for forcing the issue: Isn’t it time to talk not
only about weather, but also about climate?
It’s true, of course, that no single storm or drought can be
attributed to climate change. Atlantic hurricanes in the Northeast go way back,
as the catastrophic “snow hurricane” of 1804 attests. But many scientists
believe that rising carbon emissions could make extreme weather — like Sandy —
more likely.
“You can’t say any one single event is reflective of climate change,” William Solecki, the co-chairman of the New
York City Panel on Climate Change, told me. “But it’s illustrative of the
conditions and events and scenarios that we expect with climate change.”
In that sense, whatever its causes, Sandy offers a window into the way
ahead.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York says he told President Obama the other
day that it seems “we have a 100-year flood every two years now.” Indeed, The
Times has reported that three of the 10 biggest floods in Lower
Manhattan since 1900 have occurred in the last three years.
So brace yourself, for several reasons:
• Hurricanes form when the ocean is warm, and that warmth is their
fuel. The Atlantic waters off the East Coast set a record high temperature this summer.
Presumably most of that is natural variation, and some is human-induced climate
change.
• Computer models suggest that hurricanes won’t necessarily become
more frequent, but they may become stronger. As the United States
Global Change Research Program, a collaboration of federal agencies,
puts it, “The intensity of these storms is likely to increase in this century.”
• Climate change adds moisture to the atmosphere, which may mean that
storms come with more rain and more flooding.
• Sandy was particularly destructive because it was prevented from
moving back out to sea by a “blocking pattern” associated with the jet
stream. There’s debate about this, but one recent study suggested that melting
sea ice in the Arctic may lead to such blocking.
• Rising seas create a higher baseline for future storm surges. The New York City Panel on Climate Change has projected
that coastal waters may rise by two feet by 2050 and four feet by the end of
the century.
I was schooled in the far-reaching changes under way several years ago
by Eskimos in Alaska, who told me of their amazement at seeing changes in their
Arctic village — from melting permafrost to robins (for which their Inupiat
language has no word), and even a (shivering) porcupine. If we can’t see that
something extraordinary is going on in the world around us, we’re in trouble.
“Of the 10 warmest summers on record for the contiguous United States,
seven have occurred since 2000,” notes Jake Crouch of the National Climatic
Data Center.
They include this summer’s drought in the United States, the worst in
more than half a century.
“For the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no
explanation other than climate change,” James E. Hansen, a NASA climate
scientist, recently wrote in The Washington Post.
Politicians have dropped the ball, but so have those of us in the news
business. The number of articles about climate change fell by 41 percent from
2009 to 2011, according to DailyClimate.org.
There are no easy solutions, but we may need to invest in cleaner
energy, impose a carbon tax or other curbs on greenhouse gases, and, above all,
rethink how we can reduce the toll of a changing climate. For example, we may
not want to rebuild in some coastal areas that have been hammered by Sandy.
We’ll also need a stronger FEMA — which makes Romney’s past suggestions that FEMA be privatized particularly myopic.
(That’s almost as bizarre as Michael Brown, the FEMA director during
Hurricane Katrina, scolding Obama for responding to Sandy “so
quickly.”)
Democrats have been AWOL on climate change, but Republicans have been
even more recalcitrant. Their failure is odd, because in other areas of
national security Republicans pride themselves on their vigilance. Romney
doesn’t want to wait until he sees an Iranian nuclear weapon before acting, so
why the passivity about climate change?
Along
with eight million others, the Kristofs have lost
power, so I’ve been sending Twitter messages on my iPhone by
candlelight — an odd juxtaposition that feels like a wake-up call. In the
candlelit aftermath of a future hurricane, I’m guessing, we’ll look back at the
silence about climate in the 2012 election and ask: “What were they thinking?”
No comments:
Post a Comment