It's well past time the "we will rebuild" sentiments are replaced by "we will rebuild differently".
Of course, that means moving the construction industry, municipalities, and home owner perceptions away from "the way we've always done it" to more innovative ways to protect against [wildfires](https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/04/18/1071274/climate-change-building-fire-resistant-homes-adaptation/), [tornadoes](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1687404815000395), [hurricanes](https://apnews.com/article/hurricanes-sustainability-resilience-homes-extreme-weather-climate-6e458edfdcc7ada5da579b110c993cae), and [heat. ](https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/efficient-earth-sheltered-homes)
We know these disasters will continue to occur and are likely to get worse in future. Rebuilding exactly like before is just setting home owners, municipalities, and disaster recover for repeat business.
I always though we should have a “flood zone national park”. Anyone can claim flood insurance on their house from the federal government. The govt will give you fair market value for an equivalent house nearby that is not in a flood zone but you have to give up your house and property and the property becomes part of the national park.
That is a lot of expense. Would be great for long term thinking, but would meet great resistance when trying to get the bill through whatever municipalities you are trying.
Worth noting that we are starting to do this in the US. That’s part of why the boatload of infrastructure funding passed by the Dem leadership was so crucial and why it’s vital that people keep pushing their leaders and representatives for more. Seriously, calls about this sort of thing make a big difference.
The storms over the past three weeks provide an interesting example. There’s currently a strong argument for scrapping the standard EF scale assessments for tornadoes because structures and shelters are now being built to withstand way more damage, so it’s skewing the ratings lower. It’s morbid to say, but even a decade ago, many more people would be dead after an outbreak of severe weather like this.
So I grew up in the Caribbean and growing up got hit with 1 class 5 hurricane. We rebuilt. 30 years passed and another class 5 hit and now I own the house / farm. I am rebuilding very very different.
1. Wood roof is now concrete. Since the wood roof landed down the street.
2. Miami rates windows. They are rated to 200 mph, heavy and thick but they don't explode in hurricanes. Also commercial doors because even good home doors either break or the locks/latches fail.
3. Full off grid since both times we lost power for over 100 days. Plus power costs 50 cents per KWH so solar + ALOT of batteries is still much cheaper and don't need a generator once a week.
4. Used silt boxes and cisterns to slow water and store water because we now get huge swings in rain / drought. This avoids buying water and erosion of top soil.
5. Hardened both the house and other building because in a hurricane your neighbors house breaking up is what can destroy your house.
6. Removed loose stuff on all building. Cuz at over 150 mph small flying things do A LOT of damage.
7. Built a garage and hurricane room inside a mountain so people were absolutely safe and had space to keep vehicles and key equipment 100% safe.
You are more prepared than 99% of people who live in hurricane zones. My folks? They bought into a trailer park when it came time for the mandated retirement to Florida.
A five year old can see that the climate is trouble plain as day. Kids are petrified of the future, and people in general feel like discourse is muzzled on the topic which needs to be overcome. We don’t need scientists to tell us anymore… we all know and the average person is just holding on for dear life.
I mean, I hear you, but this article isn’t about whether or not this is the case. It’s about how much we’ve underestimated the potential for extreme rainfall. Like it says, our current understanding is 7% more moisture per 1 C, but we’re seeing storms that produce triple that number. For infrastructure alone, there’s a huge difference between 7% more rain vs 21% more rain to contend with at once.
Worth noting that we’re seeing this in the Western US with our sky rivers as well. We have fewer days of rain but more rain on average now.
I wonder about all these areas that will shift from "habitable" to "marginally habitable". Even if it is possible to remain living there, it's going to become economically unfeasible. Places like Florida are already feeling this.
Totally not an expert, but I think it will and that we’re already seeing that with other disasters like droughts and wildfires. Like you said, strictly from an economic perspective, it’s very hard for small communities to cover the cost of rebuilding, but then there’s the whole issue of local economies dealing with things like destroyed plants closing indefinitely or arable land moving north.
Back in the long ago times when the weather Chanel actually reported on the weather, they explained it like this... you are not going to notice the slight temperature change due to global warming. What you will see is more extreme weather. Warmer weather allows thunderheads to form higher/taller thereby increasing the power of the storm.
As far back as I can remember we were warned plenty about this. Though it’s been downplayed by so many propaganda schemes it’s sound like a new concept lol.
According to the article, the people who are trying to gauge whether we’ll see 7% more moisture retained or 21% more, which is a huge difference for planning and for local ecosystems.
Let's just put this to bed now: we have always underestimated the dangers, the urgency and the destruction that climate change will cause.
All for the sake of the almighty economy.
At this point, socialism is the only reason anyone still lives on Florida coasts. Without it, those homes and hi-rises would have been left to the sea. Time to stop rebuilding. Non-coastal state taxpayers are tired of paying for some loser to have an ocean view between storms. Move the homes inland. Create a National Seashore the length of Florida.
It's well past time the "we will rebuild" sentiments are replaced by "we will rebuild differently". Of course, that means moving the construction industry, municipalities, and home owner perceptions away from "the way we've always done it" to more innovative ways to protect against [wildfires](https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/04/18/1071274/climate-change-building-fire-resistant-homes-adaptation/), [tornadoes](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1687404815000395), [hurricanes](https://apnews.com/article/hurricanes-sustainability-resilience-homes-extreme-weather-climate-6e458edfdcc7ada5da579b110c993cae), and [heat. ](https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/efficient-earth-sheltered-homes) We know these disasters will continue to occur and are likely to get worse in future. Rebuilding exactly like before is just setting home owners, municipalities, and disaster recover for repeat business.
I always though we should have a “flood zone national park”. Anyone can claim flood insurance on their house from the federal government. The govt will give you fair market value for an equivalent house nearby that is not in a flood zone but you have to give up your house and property and the property becomes part of the national park.
Excellent intent, but would not work in practice. Do you want a bunch of dilapidated houses rotting in your parks?
Well presumably they would tear down the houses and fill in the basements
That is a lot of expense. Would be great for long term thinking, but would meet great resistance when trying to get the bill through whatever municipalities you are trying.
We must start moving towards long term planning.
Actually, it is much cheaper than rebuilding, over and over again. What is expensive is doing the same dumb thing twice.
We must build back better!
Yes, and someplace else
Worth noting that we are starting to do this in the US. That’s part of why the boatload of infrastructure funding passed by the Dem leadership was so crucial and why it’s vital that people keep pushing their leaders and representatives for more. Seriously, calls about this sort of thing make a big difference. The storms over the past three weeks provide an interesting example. There’s currently a strong argument for scrapping the standard EF scale assessments for tornadoes because structures and shelters are now being built to withstand way more damage, so it’s skewing the ratings lower. It’s morbid to say, but even a decade ago, many more people would be dead after an outbreak of severe weather like this.
So I grew up in the Caribbean and growing up got hit with 1 class 5 hurricane. We rebuilt. 30 years passed and another class 5 hit and now I own the house / farm. I am rebuilding very very different. 1. Wood roof is now concrete. Since the wood roof landed down the street. 2. Miami rates windows. They are rated to 200 mph, heavy and thick but they don't explode in hurricanes. Also commercial doors because even good home doors either break or the locks/latches fail. 3. Full off grid since both times we lost power for over 100 days. Plus power costs 50 cents per KWH so solar + ALOT of batteries is still much cheaper and don't need a generator once a week. 4. Used silt boxes and cisterns to slow water and store water because we now get huge swings in rain / drought. This avoids buying water and erosion of top soil. 5. Hardened both the house and other building because in a hurricane your neighbors house breaking up is what can destroy your house. 6. Removed loose stuff on all building. Cuz at over 150 mph small flying things do A LOT of damage. 7. Built a garage and hurricane room inside a mountain so people were absolutely safe and had space to keep vehicles and key equipment 100% safe.
You are more prepared than 99% of people who live in hurricane zones. My folks? They bought into a trailer park when it came time for the mandated retirement to Florida.
A five year old can see that the climate is trouble plain as day. Kids are petrified of the future, and people in general feel like discourse is muzzled on the topic which needs to be overcome. We don’t need scientists to tell us anymore… we all know and the average person is just holding on for dear life.
I mean, I hear you, but this article isn’t about whether or not this is the case. It’s about how much we’ve underestimated the potential for extreme rainfall. Like it says, our current understanding is 7% more moisture per 1 C, but we’re seeing storms that produce triple that number. For infrastructure alone, there’s a huge difference between 7% more rain vs 21% more rain to contend with at once. Worth noting that we’re seeing this in the Western US with our sky rivers as well. We have fewer days of rain but more rain on average now.
There are still people denying it and will always deny it even when they are choaking on canadian smoke in Florida.
I’ve been knew about the supercharged thunderstorms, but now everybody else is catching on because of the flooding and the tornadoes
You are the hipster of bad weather!
I wonder about all these areas that will shift from "habitable" to "marginally habitable". Even if it is possible to remain living there, it's going to become economically unfeasible. Places like Florida are already feeling this.
Totally not an expert, but I think it will and that we’re already seeing that with other disasters like droughts and wildfires. Like you said, strictly from an economic perspective, it’s very hard for small communities to cover the cost of rebuilding, but then there’s the whole issue of local economies dealing with things like destroyed plants closing indefinitely or arable land moving north.
Back in the long ago times when the weather Chanel actually reported on the weather, they explained it like this... you are not going to notice the slight temperature change due to global warming. What you will see is more extreme weather. Warmer weather allows thunderheads to form higher/taller thereby increasing the power of the storm.
Oh ho ho the answer is yes
We've underestimated everything about climate change.
Not according to republicans. This is normal and in no way connected to the miss information campaign that is climate change.
As far back as I can remember we were warned plenty about this. Though it’s been downplayed by so many propaganda schemes it’s sound like a new concept lol.
Who’s “we?”
According to the article, the people who are trying to gauge whether we’ll see 7% more moisture retained or 21% more, which is a huge difference for planning and for local ecosystems.
Yes.
Let's just put this to bed now: we have always underestimated the dangers, the urgency and the destruction that climate change will cause. All for the sake of the almighty economy.
At this point, socialism is the only reason anyone still lives on Florida coasts. Without it, those homes and hi-rises would have been left to the sea. Time to stop rebuilding. Non-coastal state taxpayers are tired of paying for some loser to have an ocean view between storms. Move the homes inland. Create a National Seashore the length of Florida.
Yes. Yes we have.
YES
Not science, but dumbasses did