Also the news here is that DARPA is interested in this, not that oysters protect shorelines – this has been known for some time. Thinking about climate change through the (slightly more practical) lens of national defense is a smart approach, perhaps it will bypass a lot of the B.S. involved in the discussion.
1. The whole world needs to bring petroleum burn rates down to sustainable levels (China and the USA will need to make the right choice for their grandchildren.) This doesn't mean complete elimination of petroleum fuels or chemical mining operations. Note, investors that promulgate sustainable management will cost everyone their job are just manipulative liars, and environmentalists that refuse to acknowledge there is a scientifically sound balance are just as naively idealistic.
2. There is a complex physics model that describes what's happening. The only controversial counterarguments are generally from non-scientific dubious communities with questionable political motives.
3. No one wants to admit the earth will return to normal about 50 000 years after human full/partial extinction events. Sustainable energy policy is a national security issue, as we will be living like cavemen if a cascade environmental change event hits us early.
4. The profits made from sustainable energy policy will enrich communities that make the right call. Or alternately desperation driven hostilities await those that choose to give their children a wasteland.
One can invest in technology that creates wealth, or prepare for endless conflict. As a people, we share a common future with the consequences from decisions all people have chosen today.
Be kind to yourselves, and have a fantastic day =3
> After the storm, multiple investigations concluded that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which had designed and built the region's levees decades earlier, was responsible for the failure of the flood-control systems. However, federal courts later ruled that the Corps could not be held financially liable due to sovereign immunity in the Flood Control Act of 1928.
and
>A June 2007 report released by the American Society of Civil Engineers determined that the failures of the levees and flood walls in New Orleans were found to be primarily the result of system design and construction flaws.[41] The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had been federally mandated in the Flood Control Act of 1965 with responsibility for the conception, design, and construction of the region's flood-control system. All of the major studies in the aftermath of Katrina concluded that the USACE was responsible for the failure of the levees. This was primarily attributed to a decision to use shorter steel sheet pilings during construction in an effort to save money.
They skimped out to save money and ended up killing 1300+ people, destroying hundreds of thousands of peoples lives, and causing hundreds of billions $$ in damages.
Fuck the Army Corps of Engineers.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina#Analysis_of_...
There are reasons that it took massive engineering to clear property and build upon it. There are reasons why even the dead are interred above-ground there. There are reasons why only the poorest of the poor tended to live in those threatened areas of town!
Now I'm not saying it's the fault of the poor residents for not moving or being underinsured, but it certainly ain't Uncle Sam's fault that Mother Nature eventually... found a way.