In case anyone needs the details to hand, here are some.
The key words are ‘may be the worst cyclone in the region ever’. If some denialist claims it is merely part of a long established pattern, here is evidence that it is part of a new pattern.
Because of the destruction and loss of life, Hurricane Katrina (2005) is considered one of the worst in US history. Although New York is well north of the main hurricane-prone latitudes it has had a surprising number of near misses, but Sandy (2012) stands out as yet another ‘worst ever’ candidate.
Kerala (2018). ,, need I go on?
I have used this weblog to try to discuss why economic growth continues to be an aim, despite the steadily mounting evidence that risinglevels of energy in the atmosphere are increasingly dangerous. Sandy seems to show how powerful are the forces preventing a mind set change. Most hurricanes or cyclones hit poverty stricken areas where although reported damage is colossal, not much of it shows up in insurance payouts, and damage to ‘wealth producers’ such as oil wells is rarely mentioned
But Sandy hit New York, a wealthy financial centre.
A possible hypothesis is that the climate denial campaign has simply copied the successful smoking causing cancer denial campaign of several decades earlier. But that only had a few million victims who could plausibly be seen as at least partly responsible for their own fate. Climate change will eventually attack everyone, whatever your livestyle. That is not yet completely true: Kerala and Mozambique are faraway places we do not even trade with very much. What hope is there that the school strikes will cause any changes, if the steadily mounting destruction and death toll from abnormal weather doesn’t?
I believe this denial phenomenon is compounded by the probability that most CEOs of transnational companies have been skilful in their judgments. Or lucky in their gambles. How is it possible to tell the difference?
I make no apology for repeating, I am keenly aware of why business as usual (growth as an aim) and denial persist. Although doing what is necessary to save the ecosphere will be considerably less unpleasant than doing nothing, it will be unpleasant. And no one, especially the poor, can be expected to tighten their belts.
I see a pressing need, for a universal basic (citizens’) income (world wide of course), or perhaps some better idea to make what is necessary thinkable.
At some point, I must try to find out why XR, which worries abut human extinction, does not yet agree with me.
Sunday post script
I have just watched a BBC news item on Mongolia. Herding, the tradtional way of life for many collapsed last year due to drought brought on by climate change.. Conequently they are crowding into Ulan Bator, the capital. That is now suffering from extreme levels of air pollution. The reason? Coal is the only form of heating, in a sunny but often very cold climate, School strikes there would do no good – very little of it is Mongolia’s fault
But hey, growth is still bringing profits somewhere else.