One story that has been greatly overlooked since the severe flooding of Hurricane Harvey - which I heard somewhere is now considered a once in a millennium level storm - is that in India, the city of Mumbai has received similarly devastating flooding.
Severe torrential rains are nothing new in southeastern Asia, but this year, these storms have seen an intensity rarely, if ever, before seen. During a period of about one hour, Mumbai received a foot of rain. The consequences have been devastating. Indeed, the Bhenzi Bazaar saw a building collapse that killed an estimated 34 people, and the death toll continues to mount from the storm overall. This flood in India has killed over 1,000 people, according to numerous estimates.
Houston has been understandably on the minds of Americans, and perhaps westerners in general, but what does it say that most people seem to have no idea about the severity of the flooding in India?
Also, let us be clear: both Houston and Mumbai saw floods that completely devastated these cities, but the fact that both seem to lack solid structures of regulation to protect their citizens from such levels of flooding seems to have contributed, and perhaps significantly contributed, to just how strong the devastation was in both cases.
There is one inescapable question that lingers: is it possible that the flood was made so much worse because of red state policies?
Severe torrential rains are nothing new in southeastern Asia, but this year, these storms have seen an intensity rarely, if ever, before seen. During a period of about one hour, Mumbai received a foot of rain. The consequences have been devastating. Indeed, the Bhenzi Bazaar saw a building collapse that killed an estimated 34 people, and the death toll continues to mount from the storm overall. This flood in India has killed over 1,000 people, according to numerous estimates.
Houston has been understandably on the minds of Americans, and perhaps westerners in general, but what does it say that most people seem to have no idea about the severity of the flooding in India?
Also, let us be clear: both Houston and Mumbai saw floods that completely devastated these cities, but the fact that both seem to lack solid structures of regulation to protect their citizens from such levels of flooding seems to have contributed, and perhaps significantly contributed, to just how strong the devastation was in both cases.
There is one inescapable question that lingers: is it possible that the flood was made so much worse because of red state policies?
Houston is a wide open city, and it is almost completely bereft of the regulations that are evident in some other cities in blue states. That includes New York City and San Francisco, and perhaps a fair criticism is that these are the two most expensive cities in the country, and maybe even excessively regulated.
However, Houston goes to the other extreme, where there seems to be absolutely no regulations. If you own land, then you can pretty much do whatever the hell you want on that land, and there is no problem.
No problem, that is, until your city gets pounded by an epic storm - again, one more of an increasing number of such extreme storms that seem to be popping up with alarming regularity - and gets flooded to an extent not visited on a a major American city since New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. It does not help that Houston has this much pavement covering the natural ground, and that the natural ground would have better absorbed those rain waters than paved surfaces can, obviously.
So, did Texas's infamously conservative political mindset make this disaster worse, by a complete lack of regulations? Can the same be said of Mumbai, where rapid development projects have gone unchecked, and where it seems like anything goes?
Indeed, sometimes we need to apply common sense to these kinds of situations. When we see severe flooding in areas that are high risk areas for flooding, then the least we can do is recognize the risk, and then build accordingly. San Francisco requires buildings to have certain minimal standards for the risk of earthquakes, for obvious reasons. Can we not demand the same of Houston, or is it more important to score political points, in the cause of red state politics and eliminating big government from imposing regulations, which let's be clear, may very well have helped to minimize the damage that Harvey caused?
And is Texas reaching a level of "anything goes" kind of policies, that the fourth largest city of the United States - still the richest country in the world for the time being - should find itself completely devastated by a storm like this, much like Mumbai - one of the largest cities in a still relatively poor country - has been by the recent floods?
Frankly, one of the things that I, personally, as a taxpayer in New Jersey, was less than thrilled about was that there was rebuilding in many of the same exact high risk flood areas following Hurricane Sandy. When we know that ocean waters are rising, and we see that storms like these are seemingly becoming more of a risk, and are occurring with undeniable, visibly greater frequency, does it not stand to reason that we need to take more serious precautions, and disallow building homes right on the shore itself? To add insult to injury, many of these people want beachfront property, and want this personal beach property to remain private, to not allow anyone else onto their property. Some of these communities reserve stretches of beaches privately for residents, and do not fully open this wonderful and beautiful place for full public access, so we seem to be essentially bailing them out to help them cut us off from the ocean again. That really irritates me, in principle and in practice. And what are the chances that we will not have to watch them get their homes flooded once again sometime within the next couple of decades or so? Will we simply focus on rescue efforts then, and once again talk about rebuilding basically exactly the same as it was before, once again?
We know that these areas - New Orleans, the Jersey Shore and other beach areas around New York and Connecticut, and the coastal region of the Gulf of Mexico - are all high risk areas for flooding. We have seen these places get slammed by serious storms, and now, in the last dozen years, we have seen three storms that, at least at the time, were considered so severe that we were assured that they were "once in a lifetime" or once in a century, and now once in a thousand years.
But that is hardly comforting, when we see that they keep happening. After all, does anyone really believe that we will not see more storms like this in the next dozen years, somewhere here in the United States? Do we not expect similar scenes to what we saw after Katrina, and Sandy, and Harvey with some entire neighborhoods submerged underwater, and people from all over the country, and indeed all over the world, flocking to these areas to help out?
I, for one, expect nothing less than more such storms. Maybe it will be one of those same areas again, or maybe it will happen somewhere else within the United States, to make no mention of other areas that receive incredible damage from storms of this nature, like Mumbai, or like Haiti, a couple of years or so ago.
Don't get me wrong: I am not trying to play the blame game here. I feel for the victims of Hurricane Harvey in southeastern Texas, and obviously, especially Houston. I also felt for the victims of Hurricane Sandy, and with Hurricane Katrina.
However, we have just elected a man into the White House who has in the not so distant past referred to climate change as a hoax invented by the Chinese, and has dismissed concerns about climate change. Now, we have Kelly An Conway assuring us that President Trump apparently does believe climate change is real, which is, for once, some level of admitting that he was wrong about something. Yet, he does not believe it has anything to do with human activity, and so, this kind of thinking goes, we can do absolutely nothing about it.
And that is just not true. If Houston was not overly paved, maybe the flood waters would not have turned into miniature rivers and seas. If houses were not crammed in low elevation places right next to the ocean here in New Jersey, maybe we would not have seen the levels of devastation that we saw. Maybe if we listened to scientists years ago, or at least now, in this year of 2017, start to recognize that this is indeed the new reality, and that scientists who projected exactly these kinds of storms and scenes for us decades ago were right, then we can at least take these kinds of possibilities into consideration. Because it is not just Houston, and not even just New Orleans. Miami, and much of Florida, indeed, seem to have regular problems with flooding anytime they get some serious rain, and it happens fairly often there. Parts of Louisiana have already been submerged underwater, although this, for some reason, never seems to make the headlines.
We cannot say that we were not warned. Yet, we Americans are known throughout the world for our stubbornness. Instead of finally accepting that climate change is real, a good percentage of Americans still believe that it is a hoax, or that the threat is overblown. These self-proclaimed experts vote for morons who reflect their disbelief, and we have one of them in the White House right now. In fact, the Republican party is the only major party of any country in the entire world that still denies climate change. The only one. And right now, they own the White House, both the House and the Senate, and the Supreme Court.
What does that say about us? How do you think the rest of the world sees us, or should respond to that kind of denial?
Personally, I cannot help but ask, every time that we see storms like the one in Houston, if we will not finally start to acknowledge reality, and finally also start to learn some lessons. The weather has been extreme, to say the least. Record heat, record cold, record flood, and record droughts. We have seen this here in the United States, and indeed, around the world. The fact that Americans have been bombarded with images and endless news from Houston, yet by and large have no close that similar, if not even more severe, flooding is taking place in Mumbai reveals a mixture of some level of the very self-centeredness, arrogance and ignorance, that unfortunately, we Americans are starting to be known for around the world.
I hate to dwell on such a thing at this point in time, yet I cannot divorce myself from it, and from the shame that I feel whenever news stories of our elected president expressing concern for Houston while simultaneously aggressively supporting policies that will assure future extreme flooding situations somewhere in the country in the relatively near future. This is the third straight president who has been confronted with this kind of a storm, a so-called"once in a lifetime" kind of storm.
Trump will not last forever, and there will be a definitive end to his presidency, which will not last beyond January 20, 2025, at the very latest (barring the possibility that he somehow exceeds his term limit, which some fear he might pursue). But future presidents, and indeed future generations of Americans, as well as future generations all around the world, will have to deal with this, because this is the new reality. Whether or not Trump chooses to acknowledge this or not will not change that fact, and it seems clear to me that he has no answers. After all, he scoffed and ridiculed President Obama for suggesting that climate change was the biggest threat facing this country. Trump turned that into some kind of a punchline, much like many narrow-minded people who share his ignorant mindset have done now for many years, even decades.
My question is: are they laughing now? Will they be laughing the next time such a storm rears it's ugly head, and drowns a once vibrant modern city underwater?
More importantly, will they ever learn to get over themselves, and start to help the situation, rather than hurt it because of their own blindness and greed?
Indeed, sometimes we need to apply common sense to these kinds of situations. When we see severe flooding in areas that are high risk areas for flooding, then the least we can do is recognize the risk, and then build accordingly. San Francisco requires buildings to have certain minimal standards for the risk of earthquakes, for obvious reasons. Can we not demand the same of Houston, or is it more important to score political points, in the cause of red state politics and eliminating big government from imposing regulations, which let's be clear, may very well have helped to minimize the damage that Harvey caused?
And is Texas reaching a level of "anything goes" kind of policies, that the fourth largest city of the United States - still the richest country in the world for the time being - should find itself completely devastated by a storm like this, much like Mumbai - one of the largest cities in a still relatively poor country - has been by the recent floods?
Frankly, one of the things that I, personally, as a taxpayer in New Jersey, was less than thrilled about was that there was rebuilding in many of the same exact high risk flood areas following Hurricane Sandy. When we know that ocean waters are rising, and we see that storms like these are seemingly becoming more of a risk, and are occurring with undeniable, visibly greater frequency, does it not stand to reason that we need to take more serious precautions, and disallow building homes right on the shore itself? To add insult to injury, many of these people want beachfront property, and want this personal beach property to remain private, to not allow anyone else onto their property. Some of these communities reserve stretches of beaches privately for residents, and do not fully open this wonderful and beautiful place for full public access, so we seem to be essentially bailing them out to help them cut us off from the ocean again. That really irritates me, in principle and in practice. And what are the chances that we will not have to watch them get their homes flooded once again sometime within the next couple of decades or so? Will we simply focus on rescue efforts then, and once again talk about rebuilding basically exactly the same as it was before, once again?
We know that these areas - New Orleans, the Jersey Shore and other beach areas around New York and Connecticut, and the coastal region of the Gulf of Mexico - are all high risk areas for flooding. We have seen these places get slammed by serious storms, and now, in the last dozen years, we have seen three storms that, at least at the time, were considered so severe that we were assured that they were "once in a lifetime" or once in a century, and now once in a thousand years.
But that is hardly comforting, when we see that they keep happening. After all, does anyone really believe that we will not see more storms like this in the next dozen years, somewhere here in the United States? Do we not expect similar scenes to what we saw after Katrina, and Sandy, and Harvey with some entire neighborhoods submerged underwater, and people from all over the country, and indeed all over the world, flocking to these areas to help out?
I, for one, expect nothing less than more such storms. Maybe it will be one of those same areas again, or maybe it will happen somewhere else within the United States, to make no mention of other areas that receive incredible damage from storms of this nature, like Mumbai, or like Haiti, a couple of years or so ago.
Don't get me wrong: I am not trying to play the blame game here. I feel for the victims of Hurricane Harvey in southeastern Texas, and obviously, especially Houston. I also felt for the victims of Hurricane Sandy, and with Hurricane Katrina.
However, we have just elected a man into the White House who has in the not so distant past referred to climate change as a hoax invented by the Chinese, and has dismissed concerns about climate change. Now, we have Kelly An Conway assuring us that President Trump apparently does believe climate change is real, which is, for once, some level of admitting that he was wrong about something. Yet, he does not believe it has anything to do with human activity, and so, this kind of thinking goes, we can do absolutely nothing about it.
And that is just not true. If Houston was not overly paved, maybe the flood waters would not have turned into miniature rivers and seas. If houses were not crammed in low elevation places right next to the ocean here in New Jersey, maybe we would not have seen the levels of devastation that we saw. Maybe if we listened to scientists years ago, or at least now, in this year of 2017, start to recognize that this is indeed the new reality, and that scientists who projected exactly these kinds of storms and scenes for us decades ago were right, then we can at least take these kinds of possibilities into consideration. Because it is not just Houston, and not even just New Orleans. Miami, and much of Florida, indeed, seem to have regular problems with flooding anytime they get some serious rain, and it happens fairly often there. Parts of Louisiana have already been submerged underwater, although this, for some reason, never seems to make the headlines.
We cannot say that we were not warned. Yet, we Americans are known throughout the world for our stubbornness. Instead of finally accepting that climate change is real, a good percentage of Americans still believe that it is a hoax, or that the threat is overblown. These self-proclaimed experts vote for morons who reflect their disbelief, and we have one of them in the White House right now. In fact, the Republican party is the only major party of any country in the entire world that still denies climate change. The only one. And right now, they own the White House, both the House and the Senate, and the Supreme Court.
What does that say about us? How do you think the rest of the world sees us, or should respond to that kind of denial?
Personally, I cannot help but ask, every time that we see storms like the one in Houston, if we will not finally start to acknowledge reality, and finally also start to learn some lessons. The weather has been extreme, to say the least. Record heat, record cold, record flood, and record droughts. We have seen this here in the United States, and indeed, around the world. The fact that Americans have been bombarded with images and endless news from Houston, yet by and large have no close that similar, if not even more severe, flooding is taking place in Mumbai reveals a mixture of some level of the very self-centeredness, arrogance and ignorance, that unfortunately, we Americans are starting to be known for around the world.
I hate to dwell on such a thing at this point in time, yet I cannot divorce myself from it, and from the shame that I feel whenever news stories of our elected president expressing concern for Houston while simultaneously aggressively supporting policies that will assure future extreme flooding situations somewhere in the country in the relatively near future. This is the third straight president who has been confronted with this kind of a storm, a so-called"once in a lifetime" kind of storm.
Trump will not last forever, and there will be a definitive end to his presidency, which will not last beyond January 20, 2025, at the very latest (barring the possibility that he somehow exceeds his term limit, which some fear he might pursue). But future presidents, and indeed future generations of Americans, as well as future generations all around the world, will have to deal with this, because this is the new reality. Whether or not Trump chooses to acknowledge this or not will not change that fact, and it seems clear to me that he has no answers. After all, he scoffed and ridiculed President Obama for suggesting that climate change was the biggest threat facing this country. Trump turned that into some kind of a punchline, much like many narrow-minded people who share his ignorant mindset have done now for many years, even decades.
My question is: are they laughing now? Will they be laughing the next time such a storm rears it's ugly head, and drowns a once vibrant modern city underwater?
More importantly, will they ever learn to get over themselves, and start to help the situation, rather than hurt it because of their own blindness and greed?
Mumbai paralyzed as Flood in India kills more than 1,000 by Associated Press, August 30, 2017:
Mumbai swamp, comparing July 2005 to August 2017 by Pankaj Joshi, September 1, 2017:
HOUSTON IS DROWNING—IN ITS FREEDOM FROM REGULATIONS BY STEVE RUSSELL ON 8/28/17
http://www.newsweek.com/houston-drowning-freedom-regulations-656087
Houston’s flooding shows what happens when you ignore science and let developers run rampant SHARE WRITTEN BY Ana Campoy David Yanofsky August 29, 2017:
No comments:
Post a Comment