How Many Climate Change Refugees Should America Let In?
A vote in the U.S. House of Representatives last week created a firestorm of controversy about how many refugees from Syria should be allowed in the U.S. The House vote, which would further restrict Syrians from entering America, received support from nearly all the Republicans and 47 Democrats, including my Colorado Democratic Congressman Jared Polis.
The controversy mostly centered around the cultural issue of allowing Syrians to enter the U.S., but the vote also raised a significant issue about the sheer number of refugees that may want to enter the U.S. in the future.
As climate change accelerates, the international refugee crisis will get worse, which should cause all of us to think through how many climate-change refugees are going to need relocation assistance now and in the future. Many political and environmental analysts have made the case that the war and refugee crisis in Syria is directly related to the country’s climate-change caused drought. The title of a recent New York Times article makes this point very clear, Researchers Link Syrian Conflict to Drought Made Worse by Climate Change. And, in an exclusive Sky News interview, England's Prince Charles affirmed that climate change is the “root cause of the Syrian war.”
I raised the climate change refugee issue in a tweet to Rep. Polis. He responded by pointing me to a letter he signed to President Obama indicating that he supports allowing many more refugees into the U.S. than President Obama—Obama wants to allow “at least 10,000,” while Polis’ letter supports allowing 10 times that, 100,000.
Whether it’s 10,000 or 100,000 entering the U.S., this situation offers a foreshadowing of America’s future in a warming world. The refugee problem will intensify dramatically in the coming years and decades. Unstable regions of the world will likely become more unstable due to climate change, whether it's from drought, flooding or sea level rise.
Here are three questions Americans and policymakers need to grapple with:
1. What countries are likely to experience dramatic floods, droughts and sea-level rise that might need large-scale human relocation due to climate change?
2. What could be the total number of people needing relocation due to climate change?
3. How many climate-change refugees is the U.S. willing to accept in the coming years? 50,000? 5 million? More?
Last week the LA Times reported that El Niño is the strongest ever recorded in history because of climate change and it “may trigger floods, famine and sickness in much of the world.” A huge situation with climate change refugees may be upon us much earlier than we think. News reports say that at least 12 million Syrians have left their homes due to the war (half are children), 4 million have left the country and at least 700,000 have fled to Europe. The Syrian refugee crisis should serve as a huge wake up call. We need to have a plan when, not if, the relocations are needed.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Eleven peaceful activists from the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise have taken to the water in inflatable boats with handheld banners to oppose the Statoil Songa Enabler oil rig, 275 km North off the Norwegian coast, in the Arctic Barents sea.
The banners say: "People Vs. Arctic Oil" and are directed at Statoil and the Norwegian government, which has opened a new, aggressive search for oil in the waters of the Barents Sea.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) paved the way Friday for the 600-mile, 42-inch fracked gas Atlantic Coast Pipeline to proceed when it issued the final environmental impact statement (FEIS). A joint project of utility giants Duke Energy and Dominion Energy, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline would move fracked gas from West Virginia into Virginia and North Carolina.
In April, the Sierra Club submitted more than 500 pages of legal and technical comments on FERC's draft EIS, which were joined by more than 18,000 individual comments detailing opposition to the project. The pipeline has been met with widespread opposition, with more than 1,000 people participating in public hearings across the three affected states. The Sierra Club recently requested that FERC issue a new environmental review document analyzing information that came in after or late in, the public comment process.
By Jessica Corbett
"It's time Rex Tillerson step down or be removed," said Gigi Kellett of Corporate Accountability International, following an announcement on Thursday that ExxonMobil will pay $2 million for violating U.S. sanctions against Russian officials while the now-secretary of state was the company's CEO.
"ExxonMobil demonstrated reckless disregard for U.S. sanction requirements," according to enforcement filing released by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which issued the penalty. Though the fine is reportedly the maximum penalty allowed, it's pittance to one of the world's most profitable and powerful corporations, which last year reported a profit of $7.8 billion.
New analysis from Amory B. Lovins debunks the notion that highly unprofitable, economically distressed nuclear plants should be further subsidized to meet financial, security, reliability and climate goals. The analysis, which will appear shortly in The Electricity Journal, shows that closing costly-to-run nuclear plants and reinvesting their saved operating costs in energy efficiency provides cheaper electricity, increases grid reliability and security, reduces more carbon, and preserves (not distorts) market integrity—all without subsidies.
By Christian Detisch and Seth Gladstone
In the wake of Senate Republicans' ever-deepening debacle over their flailing attempts to strip health insurance from 22 million people, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is desperate to do something—anything—to show that he can get legislation passed. To this end, he's bypassing the standard committee review process to push a complex 850+ page energy bill straight to the full Senate floor. Perhaps not surprisingly, this legislation, the Energy and Natural Resources Act of 2017, would be a disaster for public health and our climate.
A new law passed this week in South Miami will require all new homes built in the city to install solar panels. The measure, which was inspired by a proposal from a teenage climate activist, will go into effect in September.
The text of the ordinance details the climate impacts facing South Miami.
By Ben Jervey
Just last week, we fact-checked and debunked every line of The Dirty Secrets of Electric Cars, a video produced by Fueling U.S. Forward, a Koch-funded campaign to push fossil fuels. That video represents the group's first public pivot from fossil fuel boosterism to electric vehicle (EV) attacks. More electric vehicle experts are also picking the video apart.
One effort is this video highlighting many of the same falsehoods we wrote about, and which adds key context about some of the video footage. Like, for instance, the fact that the photo that Fueling U.S. Forward claims is a lithium, cobalt or cerium mining operation is actually a copper mine.
By Katherine Paul and Ronnie Cummins
A recent series of articles by a Washington Post reporter could have some consumers questioning the value of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) organic seal. But are a few bad eggs representative of an entire industry?
Consumers are all for cracking down on the fraudulent few who, with the help of Big Food, big retail chains and questionable certifiers give organics a bad name. But they also want stronger standards, and better enforcement—not a plan to weaken standards to accommodate "Factory Farm Organic."