Slashdot Mirror
Arkansas Has a Growing Population of "Climate Change Refugees"
HughPickens.com writes: Located between Hawaii and Australia, the Marshall Islands are made up of 29 atolls and five islands with a population of about 70,000, all of whom live about six feet above sea level. Now Story Hinkley writes in the Christian Science Monitor that another 10,000 Marshallese have moved to Springdale, Arkansas because of climate change. Because this Pacific island nation is so small, the Marshallese population in Arkansas attribute their Springdale settlement to one man, John Moody, who moved to the US in 1979 after the first wave of flooding. Moody's family eventually moved to Springdale to live with him and work for Tyson and other poultry companies based in Arkansas, eventually causing a steady flow of extended friends and family migrating to Springdale. "Probably in 10 to 20 years from now, we're all going to move," says Roselinta Keimbar adding that she likes Arkansas because it is far away from the ocean, meaning it is safe.
For more than three decades, Marshallese have moved in the thousands to the landlocked Ozark Mountains for better education, jobs and health care, thanks to an agreement that lets them live and work in the US.. This historical connection makes it an obvious destination for those facing a new threat: global warming. Marshallese Foreign Minister Tony de Brum says even a small rise in global temperatures would spell the demise of his country. While many world leaders in Paris want to curb emissions enough to cap Earth's warming at 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius), de Brum is pushing for a target that's 25 percent lower. "The thought of evacuation is repulsive to us," says de Brum. "We think that the more reasonable thing to do is to seek to end this madness, this climate madness, where people think that smaller, vulnerable countries are expendable and therefore they can continue to do business as usual." Meanwhile residents jokingly call their new home "Springdale Atoll," and there's even a Marshallese consulate in Springdale, the only one on the mainland US. "Its not our fault that the tide is getting higher," says Carlon Zedkaia,. "Just somebody else in this world that wants to get rich."
For more than three decades, Marshallese have moved in the thousands to the landlocked Ozark Mountains for better education, jobs and health care, thanks to an agreement that lets them live and work in the US.. This historical connection makes it an obvious destination for those facing a new threat: global warming. Marshallese Foreign Minister Tony de Brum says even a small rise in global temperatures would spell the demise of his country. While many world leaders in Paris want to curb emissions enough to cap Earth's warming at 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius), de Brum is pushing for a target that's 25 percent lower. "The thought of evacuation is repulsive to us," says de Brum. "We think that the more reasonable thing to do is to seek to end this madness, this climate madness, where people think that smaller, vulnerable countries are expendable and therefore they can continue to do business as usual." Meanwhile residents jokingly call their new home "Springdale Atoll," and there's even a Marshallese consulate in Springdale, the only one on the mainland US. "Its not our fault that the tide is getting higher," says Carlon Zedkaia,. "Just somebody else in this world that wants to get rich."
Now, I've traveled pretty extensively - and have enjoyed my time in Arkansas quite a bunch. But... And you knew there must be a but... I can't really imagine the hardship if you're moving to the Ozarks for a "better education." This might seem like a slam against the Ozarks and, indeed, it might be but the reality is that they're not stupid - it's that I just don't think of the Ozarks when I think of where to send people for a "better education."
Better than what? I was under the impression that we'd put schools and infrastructure in place post WWII. The climate part I get... But, of all the places to seek in the US for "better education" that seems a bit of a stretch. I'm thinking it was cheap living, ready jobs at Tyson, family, and a pre-existing culture base that was similar due to their historical roots. Hmm... I suspect "education" makes a better sound bite but damned if I'm gonna read the article - I'm no heretic.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Are they Muslims? If so this is the end to our America. And look they criticize our way of live. We will not change our ways just for a flipping atoll who have for no apparent reason access to the US. It is our right to drive where other people would walk. And it is our right to have this great market economy. Yes we can become rich. Every decent person can become rich. And we will not allow to destroy this by some island folks or the pope who is not a true Christian. Look he just visited a Mosque in Africa. And there is no such thing as human made global warming, because if there were we would have to give up our birth rights. We will never do that.
-- signed, Republican Simbot v0.5a
The Searcy County seat town of Marshall, Arkansas in the Ozarks has been suffering from an exodus of youth during the past few decades. My parents are retired there and complain that there are not enough young people to take care of the aging population. I take this as a sign of divine Providence... warming could be an act of God intended to care for my retired parents.
Gently reply
Whether you believe in God or climate change, and I'm not certain why the two are typically mutually exclusive, it has to occur to you that change is inevitable. Tangible evidence exists that the World's weather is different now, and it doesn't take a wild leap of imagination to infer that eight billion humans probably have something to do with it.
The sacrifice required now to right the ship is minimal compared to what it will become in a decade... and past a certain tipping point, there will be no remedy. Buy some land where it's presently very cold.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Huh? It says right in the summary: "Moody's family eventually moved to Springdale to live with him and work for Tyson and other poultry companies based in Arkansas". Is "working for Tyson" slang for "running from climate change" that I've never heard of?
Too bad I'm not a sculptor, I'd love to launch a climate change-related kickstarter which both sides could get behind. I'd offer to - if I could raise the expenses - make life-sized bronze statues of the world's most prominent climate-change deniers and install them on popular beaches around the world where permission could be gotten. Each statue would be on a pedestal on which is engraved one of their more prominent quotes denying climate change. The proportions of the statues would be such that at low tide the base of the pedestal is at sea height, while at high tide the top of the pedestal is at sea height, and the total height of the person matches up to the projected sea level rise over the next century.
Hence, if those denying climate change are right, a century forth they're left with a statue on their beach mocking all of the Chicken Littles. If those arguing that it's real are correct, they get to gloat as they watch the statue sink a bit further beneath the waves every year for the rest of their lives and a cautionary dive site for future generations.
I hate to bring up our imminent arrest during your crazy time, but we gotta move.
The per-capita GDP of the Marshall Islands is $2900, very low by world standards, and it has never been a lot better. Arkansas's per capita GDP, by comparison, is $31000. That alone is ample incentive for moving. That is, even a backwater, poor state like Arkansas is still a lot better that the Marshall Islands. While Westerners have some idyllic notions of island paradise, atolls have always been risky and marginal places to live; people moved there because they didn't have any other options, and these nations have always experienced large net emigration as soon as people actually had opportunities to emigrate. In addition, many of these atolls simply are not permanent, but they are temporary features that appear and disappear over thousands of years, quite naturally, regardless of human activity.
Also, to put this issue into perspective, all island nations of Melanesia, Micronesia, and Polynesia together make up less than 3 million people, who have always lived under impoverished conditions and always been at high risk from natural disasters. Even if global warming were to displace all of them, that would be comparable to the number displaced by a single major hydroelectric plant, like China's Three River Gorges dam.
At this point, the discussion is also academic because sea levels are going to continue to rise, no matter what policies we adopt, so we better find places to accommodate these people. Given that places like Europe have big demographic problems, Europeans should welcome these populations with open arms. Of course, America would also benefit from their presence and I'm glad they are settling here.
I welcome Pacific Islanders. There is about 3 million people in Micronesia, Polynesia, and Melanesia, and maybe half of them are living on these kinds of marginal atolls. The US has one million legal immigrants per year; this is a drop in the bucket. We should welcome these people with open arms, for their benefit and for ours.
It won't be just for a few thousand people in the Marshall Islands, it will be for themselves too. Their country and their lives are at severe risk from climate change. They are basically betting that they can develop fast enough to mitigate a lot of the problems, by industrializing and building defences before millions of them die.
Anyway, it's not really on most of them to fix it. It's on us in the west, and those in the far east to develop clean energy so that it is cheaper than coal anyway, at which point they will switch to it. We are already well on the way, we just need to speed the process up.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Anyway, it's not really on most of them to fix it. It's on us in the west, and those in the far east to develop clean energy so that it is cheaper than coal anyway, at which point they will switch to it. We are already well on the way, we just need to speed the process up.
I apologize for being indelicate, but that line of thinking is complete bullshit. The people of India and the Far East are not some sort of subhuman animals who can't be held accountable for their actions and it's not on the West to take responsibility for fixing everybody else's problems. I absolutely abhor PC finger-wagging, but that is some of the most bigoted tripe I've read today, even if it was couched in platitudes for our Western saviors.
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
Huh? It says right in the summary: "Moody's family eventually moved to Springdale to live with him and work for Tyson and other poultry companies based in Arkansas". Is "working for Tyson" slang for "running from climate change" that I've never heard of?
I fear I've read the article, so I'd better turn in my slashdot card. But here goes. And nothing in particular about your post - it was just a handy place for me to chime in.
As they note the first "relocator" was a Mr Moody - hey, wasn't on a lot of Lucille Ball TV shows? But I digress.
So why would a lot of Marshall Islanders want to leave their tropical paradise? Turns out there were a lot of problems where they lived - And here's why in 1979 it all started.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... We done went and made their home uninhabitable. We relocated them to other islands, but there wasn't enough resources for them to sustain life. Then we tried relocating them back to Bikini Island, but it turned out that while there were resources there, the food they grew was radioactive.
So now we can get an understanding of why and when. And in 1979, it wasn't AGW that spurred the initial migration, it was radioactivity - we'd pretty much rendered their original home uninhabitable.
Today? On Islands that are around 10 feet or less in altitude above sea level, it doesn't take a 10 foot rise to make them uninhabitable, just a combination of tides and storms happening at the right time. You might have some pretty palm trees most of the time, but the people who lived there have all drowned.
So despite Slashdotters getting their entire info from a summary and filling in the details with their preconceptions and opinions, the story is: In the 1940's the US went on an explodey rampage, and really bitched up the Marshall Islander's home.
They relocated them. Didn't work out. Unsustainable
They brought them back. Didn't work out. Radioactive food. We even tried capping the nasty stuff http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
So in the late 70's the relocation started. Then it was getting out of a mess we created. Now it very well can be a combination of a marginal location that is become vulnerable.
I'm going to get a rash of tl;dr's no doubt. But there's the story.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Flooding, crop failure, land being made unusable, extreme weather, changing economics that they are unable to adapt to quickly enough.
People who live in the western world don't die by the millions (or even the thousands) from flooding or crop failure or extreme weather. If cheap energy allows India to begin to prosper like it has allowed the west to prosper, then India can expect to begin to achieve the resiliency that westerners have in the face of bad weather.
If India is deprived of their opportunity for progress, they can expect to remain as much at risk from bad weather as they've always been.
Wars over resources
Why would there be wars over resources when fossil fuels are cheap? What resources? The water that's "flooding" them?
extreme poverty as tens or hundreds of millions of people migrate within the country.
Because they've never had a poverty problem? Because people never migrated in the past? But cheap energy and an improved lifestyle will cause extreme poverty.
Do you think people in India will believe this story? Unless the Indian people believe it completely, it's clearly not in their interest to go along with it. You might want to fill in the details for them.
No one was wrong about cooling. There were a few speculative papers about the possibilities but there were 7 times as many about warming (from 1965 to 1979).