A Sinking Nation is Offered an Escape Route. But There's a Catch. 99
The tiny Pacific island nation of Tuvalu is grappling with the imminent threats of climate change. Rising seas and increasing storms threaten the fragile coral atolls that are home to 11,000 people. A recent agreement allowing 280 Tuvaluans to migrate to Australia each year moved the nation closer to a managed retreat, but at that pace it would take decades to relocate everyone.
Tuvalu could be uninhabitable much sooner, according to projections. In parallel, the government is asserting it will maintain its statehood even without land. It also aims to digitally preserve Tuvalu's culture and history in the metaverse, as the physical place faces being drowned under rising waters. Tuvalu is strategizing for adaptation while also trying to drive global action on emissions reductions.
Tuvalu could be uninhabitable much sooner, according to projections. In parallel, the government is asserting it will maintain its statehood even without land. It also aims to digitally preserve Tuvalu's culture and history in the metaverse, as the physical place faces being drowned under rising waters. Tuvalu is strategizing for adaptation while also trying to drive global action on emissions reductions.
The fact is... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The fact is... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: The fact is... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: The fact is... (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem is that the other option - the people who are in favour of preserving oil, avoiding the use of nuclear energy, and to maintain policies that increase heat - are effectively accelerationists who seem to confuse thousands of years of change with being no different than 20-40 years of change. We have remarkable technology, but we're smart enough to understand concepts like technical debt; we need to also consider environmental debt.
It's also a common argument by climate skeptics that making the changes demanded by the same eco-warriors would also impact our comforts and that it's against humanity's progress. You didn't make that argument, but you did argue that benefits to other species are ignored, without consideration to evolution's slow pace; in brief, a prey species may thrive for a while by making the prey species easier to hunt, but if they wipe out their only food source, then the prey species doesn't benefit.
Re: The fact is... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Who says it's a net negative. There's a lot of land in North America and Asia that is uninhabited primarily because it's super cold. More people die from cold weather every year than from warm weather.
Re: The fact is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Geometry suggests that it's a net negative. Each circle of latitude (of a give width) as you get closer to the poles contains a lot less area. The standard 2D maps are quite deceptive.
OTOH, Siberia has a lot of land at each of the higher latitudes (until you reach the sea). Unfortunately, that's land that has been under permafrost, and when it thaws it's not very useful for either crops or living space. (Think of it as a rotting icy swamp.,,much of which is highly acidic and full of poisonous minerals, but not full enough to be worth refining.)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Cultures tend to flourish when the climate warms up. Not all, of course, those that were already short on water sometimes got less and collapsed, but for most it was unambiguously good.
This is one of the most foolish generalizations that people like you tend to make.
The boiling frog [wikipedia.org] also feels nice and warm as the water gradually heats up, until it eventually reaches the boiling point. Unfortunately, by that time, it's too late.
You are a frog.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, please note that I qualified the statement. I'm sorry you missed that. Did you not read past the first period? If that is a common issue for you, it might explain why you used the frog analogy.
Finally, thank you for foolishly generalizing "people like [me]" in your misidentification of my statement.
Re: (Score:2)
>Yes, it's faster, as the poster mentioned. The point is that there's a pretty blatent thought/desire among "eco warriors" for the world's ecosystems to remain static.
I don't think that's it at all. It's as the poster mention *faster* and not just faster a whole hell of a lot faster. Decades versus millennia. I don't understand why you can't understand this. Such drastic and sudden change is a disaster for ALL LIFE, dude!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Does it matter? Due to global warming, for which developed countries bear a lot of responsibility, a country is quickly being submerged. That can't be undone. However, it's 11,000 people with a history, language, art, & culture of their own. Just letting it go would be a great loss in the grand scheme of things. We should be lining up to offer them whatever hel
Re: (Score:2)
Ref: https://caamedia.org/blog/2015... [caamedia.org]
Or maybe the US government could step up again? In any case, 11,000 people is not insurmountable. It just requires the will to do it. .
Re: (Score:2)
The US will not create another nation inside it's borders, which is what this country wants. I just don't see that happening.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In any case, 11,000 people is not insurmountable. It just requires the will to do it.
I knew that was the case, but wondered how many ships/trips would be needed to handle them all...
The 10 largest cruise ships can all hold over 6,000 people each.
Every person could be evacuated with just two ships (or one ship two trips). IMO, that makes evacuation much less of a pressing issue.
Re: (Score:1)
In any case, 11,000 people is not insurmountable. It just requires the will to do it.
I knew that was the case, but wondered how many ships/trips would be needed to handle them all... The 10 largest cruise ships can all hold over 6,000 people each.
Every person could be evacuated with just two ships (or one ship two trips). IMO, that makes evacuation much less of a pressing issue.
Where would you put them? According to Goggle, Tuvalu has an area of ~10 sq mi. It might be difficult to find that much contiguous land for sale unless the Gov wanted to liquidate some of it's holdings. Then there is the issue of payment do they have that sort of money available? I'm sure they could squeeze into much less land but still where? I doubt they would be satisfied with some Nevada dessert hell hole after be accustomed to a tropical island.
Re: (Score:2)
In any case, 11,000 people is not insurmountable. It just requires the will to do it.
I knew that was the case, but wondered how many ships/trips would be needed to handle them all...
The 10 largest cruise ships can all hold over 6,000 people each.
Every person could be evacuated with just two ships (or one ship two trips). IMO, that makes evacuation much less of a pressing issue.
Where would you put them? According to Goggle, Tuvalu has an area of ~10 sq mi. It might be difficult to find that much contiguous land for sale unless the Gov wanted to liquidate some of it's holdings. Then there is the issue of payment do they have that sort of money available? I'm sure they could squeeze into much less land but still where? I doubt they would be satisfied with some Nevada dessert hell hole after be accustomed to a tropical island.
If we can put them anywhere that isn't under the ocean, then it'll be better than where they're apparently headed. I'm just saying, it's not all that time sensitive to evacuate. If and when it comes to the point that they all need to leave in a hurry, we can handle it. They can live on the cruise ship until they find a home. They probably won't be able to afford it, but that's kinda besides the point. Besides, 2 cruise ships has to be less expensive than taking 40 trips of 280 people.
Re: (Score:1)
Just letting it go would be a great loss in the grand scheme of things.
Would it though, really? There are nearly 4 billion humans on this planet, humans are pretty much the very definition of redundant. The vast majority of those 4 billion never even heard of Tuvalu before nature started taking the place back. I doubt that there will have any real effect when it's gone. 0.000275% does not seem like something we should be wringing our collective hands over.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
There are nearly 4 billion humans on this planet, humans are pretty much the very definition of redundant.
It's nearly 8 billion. You may not think women are human, but they are and they do count towards population statistics.
You are correct I made a mistake. Which of course makes 11,000 even less important. By the way, you do not really need to hide behind an "AC" to correct someone's verifiable information, I promise I'm not mad at you.
Re: (Score:2)
"Between 1971 and 2014, during a period of global warming, Tuvalu islands overall have increased in size, according to aerial photography and satellite imagery documented in a study from the University of Auckland.[42] Over four decades, there was a net increase in land area in Tuvalu of 73.5ha (2.9%), although the changes were not uniform, with 74% of land increasing in size and 27% of land decreasing in size. The sea level at the Funafuti tide gauge has risen at 3.9 mm per year"
Welcome to complex systems.
Re: (Score:1)
Sure. No matter what a study says, I can make an assertion, with no evidence, that apparently contradicts it. Use the weasel word "habitable" as a qualifier, and it might even be strictly true.
One would imagine, if there was actually a problem with sea level rise, it would affect both habitable and inhabitable land on Tuvalu. It seems that Sopoaga has determined that Tuvalu will keep growing due to coral even through sea level rise. And with a little bit of work, maybe that new coral can become habitabl
Re: (Score:2)
10,000 or 100,000 years from now, perhaps, nature would have taken its course. Not 10 years from now.
Re: (Score:1)
Sudden, catastrophic changes will appear to have taken hundreds or thousands of years if that is the resolution of the sample. Hell, this isn't even the warmest or most rapidly changing climactic period since we have been keeping records! In the early 18th century (if memory serves, but well before industri
Re: (Score:3)
You do realize there are statistical tools that allows to identify what we call a global tendency?
Your comment is the perfect example of the Dunning-Krugger effect [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
And naturally, you are immune from that effect?
As I am not a field expert, I base my assertions on actual peer-reviewed scientific studies.
You, on the other hand, are trying to dismiss climate change with broad generalizations and anecdotical data. And you do seem to think you know better than 99% of actual climate scientists/researchers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: The fact is... (Score:3, Informative)
The old oil lobby message was "It isn't happening." Now that it's obviously happening, the message becomes "It's always been happening," and/or "What's happening is good, because $wecangrowwheatinSiberia."
It's too bad Tuvalu can't sue the companies who lied them under the ocean. But they can't, never could, and we can enjoy our warm winters and Tahoe's.
Re: (Score:2)
Tuvalu has been "on the brink of extinction" for at least 20 years - the oldest article I have found so far [washingtonpost.com] goes back to November 2002.
The highest point at the Tuvalu islands [wikipedia.org] is only 15 feet above sea level, making it the lowest (closest to sea level) country on the planet. This makes me wonder how they still exist at all. Do they have no hurricanes there? How much of this "sinking" is attributed to natural erosion vs. climate change? NB: I'm asking this in good faith, not from a climate denier POV. Just b
Re:The fact is... (Score:5, Informative)
I remember reading that parts of it were eroding away but other parts were having sand deposited on them and reefs growing. And that it was actually getting bigger overall. But the new areas were useless for farming or habitation.
Mr Wiki says this
Over four decades, there was a net increase in land area in Tuvalu of 73.5ha (2.9%), although the changes were not uniform, with 74% of land increasing in size and 27% of land decreasing in size. The sea level at the Funafuti tide gauge has risen at 3.9 mm per year, which is approximately twice the global average. [wikipedia.org]
The atolls have shown resilience to gradual sea-level rise, with atolls and reef islands being able to grow under current climate conditions by generating sufficient sand and broken coral that accumulates and gets dumped on the islands during cyclones.[34][35][36] There remains the risk that the dynamic response of atolls and reef islands does not result in stable islands as tropical cyclones can strip the low-lying islands of their vegetation and soil. Tepuka Vili Vili islet of Funafuti atoll was devastated by Cyclone Meli in 1979, with all its vegetation and most of its sand swept away during the cyclone.[37] Vasafua islet, part of the Funafuti Conservation Area, was severely damaged by Cyclone Pam in 2015. The coconut palms were washed away, leaving the islet as a sand bar.[38][39] The effect of Cyclone Pam, which did not pass directly over the islands, shows that Tuvaluans are exposed to storm surges causing damage to their houses and crops, and also the risk of water born disease as a consequence of contamination of the water supplies.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty wild, right?
Re:The fact is... (Score:5, Informative)
Northern Frisia, which is not far away and settled by the same historical tribes than Western Frisia and Holland, is slowly eroding and sinking under the sea, because here, the sea is washing away the sands which it adds to Western Frisia, and towns like Rungholt were destroyed, with the remainders now only reachable during low tide, while islands like Texel are slowly growing and will continue to grow even without human intervention, if the sea levels don't rise any further.
The Dutch dyke system relies heavily on polders, areas of land enclosed in dykes. All the dykes have openings with weirs, which get closed on high tide and opened on low tide. Thus water in the polder can flow out without sea water coming in. It works fine, because the difference between high and low tide is about 7 to 10 feet along the dutch coast. Florida for instance has a difference of only 1 foot, and so is the difference in Tuvalu. The high difference comes from the fact that the Netherlands are on a coast along the Northern Sea and not bordering the open ocean. This causes the amount water floating in each tide from the Atlantic to be huge compared with the amount of water of the Northern Sea, and thus causing large water level differences. You find similar effects also along the U.S. and Canadian coast, but there, the coastline is mountainous, thus the flooding does not create mudflats.
The Netherlands are unique in this regard, and thus they are the only country with a dyke system that large. Bangladesh for instance could not use a similar system. They would not be able to move the water from the Ganges and Brahmaputra river into the ocean, because the rising ocean levels would be higher than the river water level. Additionally, the whole coastline of the Netherlands stretches about 250 miles from the Southwest to the Northeast. The whole land area of the Netherlands on the other hand is 16,000 sq mi, so for each mile of dyke system, you have about 600 square miles of dry land. An island nation like Tuvalu, the Maldives or Niue does not have enough sand to build the required dykes. Tuvalu for instance has only 10 sq mi, and given the Dutch quote, they could barely manage to build about 100 feet of dyke the size of a dutch one. Even creating a single polder like one in the Dutch system would require them to multiply their land territory several times.
So whoever brings up the Netherlands as an example has either no clue or is just hunting for cheap debate points, but does not offer a glimpse of a solution.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This whole argument is missing the point. The problem is the climate is changing rapidly due to human actions, not that the Earth doesn't change ever. The change in the climate year-to-year should be roughly none.
The other stupid argument I hear is "but the earth was already warmer in the past" which is true, but doesn't mean humanity will be able to survive it at that temperature or that all our cities will be able to exist. The Earth will basically be ok no matter what happens, but the humans on it mig
Re: (Score:1)
This whole argument is missing the point. The problem is the climate is changing rapidly due to human actions, not that the Earth doesn't change ever.
It is one of the primary "arguments" of the deniers since effects became undeniable. Obviously they needed to shift the lie, so they are now basically claiming that changes over 100 years are no different than changes over 100'000 years. These people are deeply stupid and desperately want to ignore the problem as it gets worse and worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There might still be problems with the islands because of climate change, but the people of Tuvalu want visas to Australia for economic reasons.
Catch Omitted for Clarity (Score:5, Informative)
From TFA:
It is likely to be a referendum on the Falepili (“good neighborliness”) Union treaty with Australia, which offered Tuvaluans visas and about $11 million for coastal restoration, as well as a pledge to assist Tuvalu in case of a natural disaster, pandemic or military aggression.
But it comes with a catch: Canberra must agree before Tuvalu inks a security or defense deal with any other country.
That clause is widely seen as an effort to lock out China, which has raised alarms in the West with its growing presence in the South Pacific, especially in the Solomon Islands, where Beijing secured diplomatic recognition in 2019 and struck a security agreement last year.
Announcing the agreement with Natano last month, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Australia would need to approve any security or defense deal Tuvalu struck with another “state or entity” in order to “allow for effective operation of Australia’s security guarantee.” Some analysts see that as an attempt to avoid a repeat of the Solomon Islands, where both Chinese and Australian police are now deployed.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Beyond the strategic security concerns, there is a serious risk that the islands will tip over like Guam [youtube.com] if people emigrate too quickly. That's the major reason that Australia has to limit the number of refugees it accepts each year.
Re: (Score:2)
Since Tuvalu is moving to the metaverse - maybe Australia is worried about Zuckerberg's nukes.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that Australia has some of the worst per-capita emissions, and is making very slow progress on dealing with them, you can see why they might be worried that countries affected by climate change look to China. China is the only major economy that is well ahead of its climate goals, although even those need to be much more aggressive.
Countries like Australia are going to end up paying for this one way it another. There have already been agreements on payments to affected developing nations, but Australi
Re: (Score:2)
Looks likes TFS leaves the catch as exercise for the reader.
From TFA:
It is likely to be a referendum on the Falepili (“good neighborliness”) Union treaty with Australia, which offered Tuvaluans visas and about $11 million for coastal restoration, as well as a pledge to assist Tuvalu in case of a natural disaster, pandemic or military aggression.
But it comes with a catch: Canberra must agree before Tuvalu inks a security or defense deal with any other country.
That clause is widely seen as an effort to lock out China, which has raised alarms in the West with its growing presence in the South Pacific, especially in the Solomon Islands, where Beijing secured diplomatic recognition in 2019 and struck a security agreement last year.
Announcing the agreement with Natano last month, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Australia would need to approve any security or defense deal Tuvalu struck with another “state or entity” in order to “allow for effective operation of Australia’s security guarantee.” Some analysts see that as an attempt to avoid a repeat of the Solomon Islands, where both Chinese and Australian police are now deployed.
That's not much of a catch, Australia, being a parliamentary democracy has to approve of new laws in parliament (except the ones foisted on Australia by a US trade treaty, thanks John "lick Bush's arse" Howard). Not such a big issue with the current government and it's only 11,000 people over a decade... The big risk for Tuvalu is that the LNP gets back in and they're infamous for their xenophobia (a culture of which, is something Australia has a bit of a problem with).
Australia has elections every 3 yea
coastal erosion (Score:5, Insightful)
Tuvalu's problems are human caused, but they have more to do with coastal erosion than the rise of sea levels. Mining and coastal development combined with lack of regulation and poor planning have resulted in this. The problematic locations are not showing the typical signs of sea level rise, but showing every sign of loss of sediment due to near by engineering projects. (ref [springer.com])
I'd like for climate change reporting to have more science to it. It does us no service to parade around easily disproven example cases. It'll be like the Boy Who Cried Wolf and when we really have problems with climate change they'll fall on deaf ears.
You must be (Score:3)
new around here?
Re: (Score:2)
Reports from this 2023 [nasa.gov] imply that the sea level rise is a threat but not currently the primary cause of their issues. The more you read on the subject the more you find dire predictions rather than a dramatic report on the current status.
For the most part Tuvalu's land reclamation has offset their losses to current sea level rise. This is why a cursory examination of raw numbers on changes in land area suggests that Tuvalu has had little negative effects by sea level rise. But pretty much everyone admits th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It'll be like the Boy Who Cried Wolf and when we really have problems with climate change they'll fall on deaf ears.
You seem as if this wasn't a planned outcome. It was planned and it is desired. There is no plan to save the environment. There are a large number of plans to continue exploiting the environment without regard to consequences.
Don't worry though, they have been working on creating biodomes for many decades now.
Nuclear fission? Or problem solved? (Score:1, Troll)
With every story on how global warming i making things worse for humans should come some mention on how anyone plans to solve the problem. The source of the problem is burning of fossil fuels, and the largest contributor is electricity production. We have nuclear fission as a means to reduce CO2 from electricity production but when mention I hear a chorus of people singing like Meatloaf, "but I won't do THAT!"
Anyone that wants to reply with "nobody wants nukes" is just doubling down on how global warming
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
You're not the only one to say so. [replanet.ngo]
I know, and the number of people saying the same are growing.
Your posts would be more readable if they were briefer, though.
I try to be brief but experience tells me that if I don't "front load" my comments with something to rebut the usual replies then I just get the same nonsense replies over and over. They usually start with something like, "But you forget about..."
There's at least one anonymous coward that likes to follow me around to claim "nobody wants nukes" which is sometimes followed with cherry picked nuclear power projects that ran over budget and beyond sc
Re: (Score:2)
True. There are others that cannot do basic numbers and are ignoring all observation about practical nuclear.
Re: (Score:1)
True. There are others that cannot do basic numbers and are ignoring all observation about practical nuclear.
Here's some "basic numbers" to work with on nuclear power. There's watts per square meter.
http://www.inference.org.uk/ma... [inference.org.uk]
On that chart it doesn't show nuclear fission as getting 1000 W/m2. Most anyone should be able to manage some onshore wind since much of the land the windmills occupy can be used for crops that produce food and fiber. If there's some of this crop used for fuel then there needs to be a balance on that to avoid the "eat or heat" dilemma. Perhaps use the plant chaff as feedstock for a
Re: (Score:2)
Not interested in your lies. I have debunked them often enough. You people are unable to listen and unable to think.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, we have lots of solutions including nuclear/wind/solar energy together with electrification of transportation and heating. The problem isn't that we don't know how to fix climate change, the problem is we aren't implementing the solutions in a timely manner.
The Dutch and Italians seem to be doing alright (Score:2)
I see no cause for serious concern.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
You seem to forget that large-scale public works projects like the Netherlands' dykes have to be paid for... with (gasp) taxes. And as we all know, taxes are highway robbery of the sovereign people by godless grooming LGBT commie muntant traitors that make the baby jesus cry.
Re: (Score:2)
Do a lot of Dutch people complain about paying to maintain the dykes?
Re: (Score:2)
I have no idea what you are trying to say, just that it comes off as both stupid and mildly insulting.
Do a lot of Dutch people complain about paying to maintain the dykes?
Are there a lot of Dutch people to tax?
Are there a lot of Tuvaluans?
Hint:
Netherlands has 17 million people and a GDP of a trillion US dollars.
Tuvalu has only 11 thousand people, and a GDP of 63 million US dollars.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
A dyke is different than a dike.
In what dictionary?
I looked up what "dyke" means and I find it is a variant spelling on "dike". Use of "dyke" is a bit unusual and/or archaic spelling, at least in the USA, but is cromulent English.
Re: (Score:2)
They're not the same, although Netherlands makes both of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I see now.
Example search result for "dyke": https://www.today.com/popcultu... [today.com]
Another example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Typical search result for "dike": https://cravingsinamsterdam.co... [cravingsinamsterdam.com]
I suspect that people have the surname "Dyke" because they descend from people that built dikes and/or lived upon them, especially the variant "Van Dyke" which means "from the dike". Use of "dyke" for what I might call "wire cutters" is no doubt a shorthand for "diagonal cutters". I don't have any such tool, no
Re: (Score:2)
Venice did sink, yet thrives. The Dutch built dykes, and thrive. A number of nations artificially extend their shorelines or build new islands.
I see no cause for serious concern.
Well, there are 11,000 people seeing the island they live upon becoming less hospitable with time. They need some outside help or everyone will eventually drown, starve, or face some other bitter end. Even if they can keep the island from shrinking it still sounds like they are facing a slow salting of the Earth from seawater encroaching on the land they use to grow food.
In the fine article it appears this is more complicated than keeping the seas from consuming the island, this is territory that could be
Re: (Score:1)
The Metaverse is also sinking though (Score:2)
Personally if I were running the show in Tuvala I'd take whatever money they're throwing down a pit in metaverse nonsense and use it instead to invest in some flood barriers. Or, if that's too infeasible, then just give it directly to your residents so they can use it to flee somewhere at a higher elevation.
11,000 people is a sneeze (Score:2)
There are over 10,000 migrants crossing the US southern border every day. If Tuvalu sucks these people will migrate elsewhere too.
Send the deniers there in exchange (Score:2)
Then we can at least have one positive effect from the island sinking. They can then deny all day long that they are drowning.
Nature says land area is growing (Score:2)
Results highlight a net increase in land area in Tuvalu of 73.5 ha (2.9%), despite sea-level rise, and land area increase in eight of nine atolls.9 Feb 2018
The reason is bleeding obvious. Atolls are made of coral which grows to stay within a certain distance of the surface of the sea. But carry on with your climate alarmism
https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Results highlight a net increase in land area in Tuvalu of 73.5 ha (2.9%), despite sea-level rise, and land area increase in eight of nine atolls.9 Feb 2018
The reason is bleeding obvious. Atolls are made of coral which grows to stay within a certain distance of the surface of the sea. But carry on with your climate alarmism
https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com].
Only if they can grow fast enough.
And ocean acidification doesn't kill them all.
Re: (Score:1)
That being said this is really just the nature of the beast living this close to the ocean. I spend a lot of time in tidal areas and every storm changes things significantly.
You're being ignored. Good. (Score:4, Informative)
I have been watching these weekly copy pasta posts by msmash from the Guardian Climate Disease desk, and have noted two distinct trends: 1) Slashdot users are largely dismissive, and 2) these posts get very low levels of interaction. That is excellent news.
My issue with these climate disease people is the gaslighting. For example, the land area in the island nation mentioned in this latest installment has been growing for several decades, not "sinking". But what's the headline? It's sinking! It's sinking! *sigh*
Relocate climate change deniers (Score:2)
Just once catch. No emergency rescue in case of hurricanes or other weather related problems. If infrastructure needs to be replaced because of damage that will happen, but there will be no rush effort. If it takes a few months to assemble all the material needed that's the schedule. It takes as long as it take
Why such low numbers? (Score:2)
There are 11 thousand people on Tuvalu in total (if I believe the summary). That's not very many. So why only move so few people per year? Wouldn't it make much more sense to start building a new town or several to prepare moving them all at once as a working community? Bringing with them all companies and craftsmen? Of course, fishing wouldn't be much of a venture somewhere in Australia.
Yes, it's a lot to prepare and needs to be organized, but it could be done and it would keep the community alive.
Re: (Score:1)
That only makes sense if you take their complaint at face value. Which you
really shouldn't do, because there are politics involved.
The _short_ version is, the people in some of the Pacific atoll islands have
figured out that global warming is a big talking point in the West, which has
a lot of money. So they make a lot of noise about how it's going to hurt them,
because that gets them sympathy, which gets them more foreign aid, whic
Tuvalu's real asset... (Score:2)