The Guardian: Americans Need to Accept Climate Migrants from California

Australia is currently suffering a severe drought. CSIRO [CC BY 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

A very confused Guardian article which seems to suggest global warming is reproducing 1930s dust bowl conditions, and poor forest management is a climate migration issue.

Americans are becoming climate migrants before our eyes

Alex Domash
Fri 2 Oct 2020 22.05 AEST

While the US closes the doors on climate migrants from abroad, it must acknowledge that the problem has already come home

In November 2018, I traveled with a caravan of thousands of Central American migrants as they marched across Mexico towards the US border. While some were seeking refuge in the US from gang violence or political persecution, many others were looking to escape something much more subtle: climate change. The Trump administration decried these climate migrants as “invaders” and attempted to build a wall to keep them out.

The message from the visceral scenes unfolding in the western US is clear: climate displacement isn’t something that happens only outside of our borders. It has already begun in the US, and we can no longer turn our backs on the more than 20 million climate migrants worldwide.

But the American dream of tomorrow is also under great stress. The climate displacement of the Dust Bowl era is already here – and has been here for many, many years.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/02/climate-change-migration-us-wildfires

Little of what Alex Domash describes has anything to do with anthropogenic climate change.

The dust bowl was not the product of anthropogenic CO2, it was a natural climate shift – which could happen again, anytime. Even most alarmists admit there wasn’t enough anthropogenic CO2 in the early 20th century to make much of a difference.

Reconstructions of the past US climate suggests pre-Columbian America was plagued by decades long mega-droughts, centuries before anthropogenic CO2 became a significant issue.

As for the forest fires, even greens like California Governor Gavin Newsom sometimes admit there have been a few shortcomings with forest management.

My point is, another severe US drought could happen anytime, regardless of what happens to anthropogenic CO2.

The question is, what to do about it. Do you bunker down with wind turbines and solar panels, and hope the rains come this year?

Or do you think ahead, release as much CO2 plant fertiliser as is convenient, and build up national engineering and industrial capabilities, to create the capacity to adapt to and overcome natural disasters like droughts?

Given a future mega-drought or dust bowl is inevitable, regardless of climate policy, it surely makes more sense to ensure we can do something about it when it happens, to ensure we have the economic and engineering capacity to affordably transport or even desalinate gigalitres of water, to replace whatever rainfall is lost to the drought.

Greens like Alex might want to cower in their eco-bunkers, or run away from the pain, accepting whatever nature throws their way. I prefer a future of vast engineering projects, in which mankind has achieved our utmost potential, including where necessary taking control of nature. A future in which disasters like extended droughts no longer pose any threat to national wellbeing and prosperity.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/3jyOeKA

October 4, 2020 at 12:03AM

Author: uwe.roland.gross

Don`t worry there is no significant man- made global warming. The global warming scare is not driven by science but driven by politics. Al Gore and the UN are dead wrong on climate fears. The IPCC process is a perversion of science.