Submitted by imrussellcrowe t3_yymwth in worldnews
Reply to comment by yxxngwxlf in Tuvalu starts to digitise their nation as rising seas threaten existence | Tuvalu said on Thursday that it plans to build a digital version of itself, replicating islands and landmarks and preserving its history and culture as rising sea levels threaten to submerge the tiny Pacific nation by imrussellcrowe
There are already a few nations, such as the Kiribati, Marshall Islands, etc that are planning total evacuations of everyone to either Australia, New Zealand or the US, due to these places being fully under water in the future. For Marshall Islands, it's a bit easier due to the Compact Free Association with the US (basically allows free movement + the ability to use some gov services).
Sorry for the tangent: the whole situation is sad and complex in the way it will need to be taken care of.
Wouldn't it be better if they just became automatic US Citizens. Its 60K people. Don't think it would matter much in USA with that number relocating here.
IIRC there is a special fast track system specifically for people part of Compact Free Association islands. Though yes, just giving them citizenship would be better. Fun fact, there is already a large Marshallese population in Arkansas.
Oh wow, had no idea about that. Yea, definitely got enough space for them considering how big USA is. I just googled it and its 3 countries: the Republic of the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), andRepublic of Palau.
Marshall is 60K pop, Micronesia is 116k and Palau18k. Pretty sure, USA takes in more refuges than that population combined each year.
The US took in more refugees than that from Cuba alone in the last year.
There are a lot more non-atoll islands in Micronesia, there’d obviously be some on atolls who would need to evacuate but not the majority for sure
[deleted]
>level 2RubberPny · 6 hr. agoThere are already a few nations, such as the Kiribati, Marshall Islands, etc that are planning total evacuations of everyone to either Australia, New Zealand or the US, due to these places being fully under water in the future. For Marshall Islands, it's a bit easier due to the Compact Free Association with the US (basically allows free movement + the ability to use some gov services).Sorry for the tangent: the whole situation is sad and complex in the way it will need to be taken care of.
Let me put this in US Media speak:
A HORDE of unchecked IMMIGRANTS who might be CRIMINALS AND RAPISTS are RAVAGING OUR SHORES
These immigrants speak English. Americans are much much more accepting of immigrants who speak English and are preferably Christian.
Some of the scant handful of ukrainians that have been allowed to temporarily live in the United States have been treated like absolute f****** dog s***
Proof? That's bullshit
why though
… seriously you don’t understand that post?
override367 was saying that all this mass migration caused by climate change is going to be managed by right wing public entities in predictable ways; they will be exploited as “other” to distract from problems at home, and minimised to reduce their rights in the eyes of people in safer locations.
That’s “why though”.
They aren’t supporting that stance.
Yeah I'm a little disappointed no one got the sarcasm. :( Poor Override
We got the sarcasm, we just thought it was cheesy and tiring.
about 1100km from the pacific lol
[removed]
No offense but I think they'd much prefer to move to NZ or Australia
[removed]
This is a comment stealing bot that copies+pastes segments of other comments for karma farming. Be aware of comments that look suspiciously similar to other, popular comments.
The original comment was made around 12 minutes before this one
[deleted]
If c02 output dropped to 0 today then the islands would still flood.
[deleted]
Yes am- but your claim was that they are being flooded because polluters won’t lower their output. I’m only pointing out that if output went to 0 today then enough damage has been done already and these islands are already lost.
You are being overly pedantic, as Redditor's do so love to do, and missing the broader point. So go back and say because emissions weren't lowered 20 years ago when we knew this was a problem, or emissions weren't lowered 40 years ago when experts in the Energy industry and research scientists knew this was a problem.
Being technically correct doesn't always make you right.
I am both technically and factually correct and it is, unfortunately, you who has missed the broader point by mentioning an irrelevant one.
Yes if we had a Time Machine and political will we could have fixed it 40 years ago. We don’t.
I simply and clearly stated completely eliminating emissions would do nothing for Tuvalu now, it’s too late.
Yes yes you win the debate great pedant lord.
[removed]
Yes. Polluters needed to lower CO2 output decades ago. Islands will flood unless the govts find some incredible solution to lowering temps. E.g. simulating volcano eruptions worldwide to block 10% of sunlight. Which would then lead to reduced crop production and starvation. It's a fucking grim future for our children.
Thanks Nostradumbass.
Oh you’re right! Why bother doing anything?
I mean, we polluted massively for ages when being told it would cause intense problems whilst denying climate change, and now we’ll accept climate change is a thing when we can just say “changing won’t wake a difference”.
I guess the step after that is to somehow blame those who tried to warn us, say they weren’t doing enough and it’s their fault we have this problem? Whilst continuing to pollute?
And after that we can move to cheaper and more profitable renewables anyway with the money made from wrecking the planet and claim we were part of the solution all along?
I like your plan. I mean, it’s 100% asshole, but well done.
I did not state any plan for the future. I only commented that it was too late to help Tuvalu. Work on your reading comprehension dumbass .
My point is, your comment was completely useless.
It implies we shouldn’t bother, the damage was already done. Well done on comprehending your own comments there, and being part of the problem.
My comment does not imply anything. It directly states that Tuvalu is gone no matter what. Any implication you are deriving is a result of poor inference and reading comprehension skills on your part.
There's a greater context to this conversation, but if you prefer to have a shallow conversation I guess that's up to you
And i understand that and have had many before and would’ve had one now except for the tiny little thing where you immediately popped off and insulted me with assumptions for a point I was never arguing.
Obviously emissions need to be cut, yesterday, but you didn’t try to discuss that and instead chose to aggressively comment with false assumptions. Something to think about for the next time.
Cheers.
I'm just sick of all the apathy, which your comment really read as. Glad that's not how you feel about it.
I believe they meant logistically complicated.
[deleted]
Livestock produces more CO2 than vehicle activity.
Do you have a source for that? Our World in Data shows that transportation is responsible for 16.2% of global greenhouse gas emissions, while livestock is just 5.8%
I think these are represenated so differently in different sources because they are contingent on how you calculate emissions - for example how much of transportation is related to getting animals from farm to plate? what about supporting infrastructure sure as abbatoirs, tractors, roads ECT? Should you add those? Some would and some wouldn't depending on their standards or how they wanted represent the data.
Also the OP posted cars which are actually not a large part of transportation - trucks, trains, planes and ships emit a fair percentage of transportation related emissions
[deleted]
Kiribati spent almost 10 million dollars on a bunch of land in Fiji, reportedly with the aim of moving all of their citizens there. To me it seems like a political stunt and unlikely to ever develop into anything, but it's sad nevertheless that's it's even a possibility. Now they are just using the land for food production, but who knows.
As an Australian, I can't see us offering citizenship or a mass migration of people without something in return like fishing rights. Maybe we would for a lucky few, but the masses would need to give up their sovereignty and land most likely. Just guessing though.
The deal with Fiji on Vanua Levu is still pretty likely to happen- when I was in Savusavu in 2014 Tuvalu and Kiribati already had small immigrant communities and citizen representatives there, I met them at the local fair at their tents. Cool people, but the struggle at the time was that Vanua Levu’s infrastructure needed a lot of work (in progress when I left), getting people over was another issue and there are only a couple big towns on the island (Savusavu and Labasa), so it was planned that by the 2020s and 2030s this would be more actively pursued.
This is incredibly sad especially since these small island nations have little to do with the problems that created this
The west want to wash their guilt away by giving these nations a few million dollars and wiping their hands of the matter. It is atrocious.
Exactly and it’s essentially throwing money at something and ‘hoping’ it gets better or miraculously goes away
Fiji and other mountainous Pacific islands have also been courted as candidates. Kiribati iirc has an agreement with them. Unless it’s warming as opposed to just sea level rise.
[removed]
In middle school we did a class project in middle school where I was Tuvalu.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments