SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Center for American Progress reports
This year has been "anything but ordinary" according to the latest data released by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). In the first three months of 2018, the United States has seen three climate and weather disasters each resulting in more than $1 billion in damages.
Two of the four nor'easters to hit the central and eastern U.S. during a one month period resulted in record snowfall and more than a billion dollars in losses each. Millions were without power and hundreds of flights were grounded. Multiple deaths were reported across Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Virginia.
In mid-March, a deadly storm also hit the Gulf Coast with reports of dangerous winds, hail, and tornadoes. At least three people died and 20 tornadoes were reported in Alabama.
"It has been quite some time since the U.S. has experienced multiple, billion-dollar winter storm events", said Adam Smith, the NOAA scientist who compiled the data.
All told, the January to March period of the past three years has had the highest frequency of billion-dollar disasters on record since 1980--with 2018 surpassed only by 2016 and 2017.
As Smith told ThinkProgress via email, not only is the number of billion-dollar winter storms experienced in the past few years increasing, but the cost of these winter storms are increasingly above average compared to the 1990s, when a series of damaging storms--including a 1997-98 ice storm that hit the northeast--crippled parts of the country.
[...] Like with summertime hurricanes, winter nor'easters start in the ocean. And with warmer waters, these storms become more intense. According to Accuweather, this year's series of devastating nor'easters spent more time forming over the ocean, giving them a chance to increase in strength by absorbing more of the warmer ocean temperatures.
Additionally, with higher sea levels come more devastating storm surges. Massachusetts, for example, was repeatedly hit with coastal flooding during this year's winter storms.
Related: Climate change dials down Atlantic Ocean heating system
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday April 12 2018, @10:13PM (9 children)
As a non-American Soylentil I can confirm that the climate change deniers are almost exclusively American.
In the rest of the Western world we are not drowned in quite the same amount of propaganda (in a general sense), and the massively wealthy are not given the same control that they are in the US.
Climate change denial nonsense is almost exclusively from the people who stand to benefit most from fossil-fuel industries, supported by their useful idiots.
In my country there is a low level of climate change denial, but only from the extreme right-wing (universally wealthy white men) and they are not taken particularly seriously in our national politics.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12 2018, @10:38PM (1 child)
> the massively wealthy are not given the same control that they are in the US.
How cute. You must be European. I'm sure you don't even recognize you're apart of the German Empire now. But at least you got to stick it to those Americans! ;-)
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Saturday April 14 2018, @08:55AM
No, not even close. Also, like everyone else in the civilised world,we really like the Americans we meet traveling in our country, but then they are not the Americans stuck in some Mid-West shithole terrified they might be bankrupted by some minor accident or illness.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12 2018, @10:59PM
With a sprinkle of Aussies, those who stand to lose profits or jobs from coal mining.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @02:37AM (2 children)
The majority is not always correct, oven if it is overwhelming. Have you heard of groupthink? What steps are climate policymakers taking to avoid that?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @02:56PM (1 child)
You realize that logic applies equally to your own position right? And you don't even have valid data to back up your position.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @03:19AM
Groupthink is associated with the "in" group position. Where I live, the "in" group really thinks global warming is a big deal, and the "out" group, which is the minority doesn't.
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Saturday April 14 2018, @01:28AM (2 children)
Let us note the propaganda is very one-sided in favor of exaggerating the impact of global warming. Yet that doesn't stop the Very Confident people from complaining about the Very Imaginary propaganda of the massively wealthy.
Which is probably why you turned out so clueless about the actual effects of global warming and other climate change.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Saturday April 14 2018, @08:58AM (1 child)
I'll take being called clueless by you as a badge of honour actually.
You might well be the stupidist person posting here now that Ethanol Fuelled seems to have pushed off.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:00PM
In your first post, you made a bunch of assertions and it appears you haven't really thought about any part of that at all. As a resident of the US, I'm drowning in non-existent pro-fossil fuel propaganda because feelz. I actually compared the amounts being spent on said propaganda (there are plenty of news stories talking about these actual dollar amounts). And no matter how much you exaggerate the money being spent by Big Oil, the Koch brothers, etc, they're outspent by at least an order of magnitude (for example, look at the budget of Greenpeace International or the World Wildlife Fund). Even in the US, it's a rout.
You also don't see most journalists siding with that side ever - it's very one-sided in favor of exaggerating climate change once you get outside of the holdouts like Fox News or Breibart. Again, that's in the US.
The first thing is what is "climate change denial nonsense"? Your sloppy language led me to conclude you meant anyone you happen to disagree with. I happen to believe there is global warming caused by humans, but it's not urgent enough to justify impairing our societies now when we're solving bigger problems like overpopulation and global poverty. Asserting without evidence that I'm stupid hasn't yet persuaded me that my viewpoint is in error.
Moving on, we have the usual empty accusation that I must somehow be a useful idiot for someone who profits from the situation. Unless the situation is entirely trivial with no consequence to anyone, then there's always someone who will profit. I don't create my opinions based on who is likely to profit from them. Maybe you shouldn't either.
That's too bad. You shouldn't let the extremes take control of such an important issue. That's part of the reason such factions are growing in power right now. When convention thought excludes important societal issues such as immigration control or the cost of climate change mitigation, then extreme viewpoints get to own them and acquire credibility that they wouldn't have in a rational society.