Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday December 01 2015, @09:41PM   Printer-friendly

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."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by takyon on Wednesday December 02 2015, @04:02AM

    by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Wednesday December 02 2015, @04:02AM (#270482) Journal

    All the military prediction reports talk about food and water security impacted by climate change.

    http://csis.org/files/publication/151106_Miller_Defense2045_Web.pdf [csis.org]

    The quest for control of strategic resources has always been a critical component of geopolitics. In the future, as the world’s population balloons to an estimated 9.4 billion by 2045, that competition will grow more acute. Perhaps the three most important strategic resources will be energy, water, and food, especially given their interdependence. Water is critical for crop irrigation as well as energy generation—from hydropower to cooling thermal power plants and extracting fossil fuels such as shale gas. Exacerbated by the effects of climate change, the competition over these scarce resources may lead to increased conflict. In April 2014, Jim Yong Kim, World Bank president, stated, “Fights over water and food are going to be the most significant direct impacts of climate change in the next five to 10 years.”

    I assumed Sanders picked up the ISIS/climate change from one such report linking increased temperatures and resource scarcity to increased threat of terrorism.

    That's not to say that everyone suffers in a global warming scenario. Global warming could help Russia grow more crops, and Canada is uniquely poised to benefit with its high volume of fresh water and low population.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 02 2015, @07:43AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 02 2015, @07:43AM (#270524)

    Canada is uniquely poised to benefit with its high volume of fresh water and low population

    I knew it!!! Canada is a terrorist!

  • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday December 02 2015, @12:46PM

    by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday December 02 2015, @12:46PM (#270603)

    Canada is uniquely poised to benefit with its high volume of fresh water and low population.

    Maybe, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were Canadian politicians advocating to build a wall along the US-Canada border to keep out all those freeloading illegals with their strange foods (like that weird deep-fried stuff on a stick) and customs who don't even know how to speak French properly.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
  • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Wednesday December 02 2015, @07:29PM

    by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Wednesday December 02 2015, @07:29PM (#270861)

    Global warming could help Russia grow more crops, and Canada is uniquely poised to benefit with its high volume of fresh water and low population.

    Could, but not necessarily. The biggest misconception about global warming/climate change is that it will get uniformly warmer everywhere. The problem is we do not know that is the case, and even if it does, it may take decades or longer for the climate to stabilize into the sort of predictable patterns that allow mass agricultural production. Canada and Russia might instead see harsher winters with much greater amounts of snowfall, or they might get that one winter and the near opposite the next. Climate change will not require moving food production northward, it will require adaptable food production technologies that are capable of moving from season to season. That will likely require government intervention on a vast scale, as it could not be done with a system of private ownership of property.