Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

Explore news, videos, and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

To get started, first

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    What Country Faces the Worst Climate Change?

    Rising seas threaten to drown island countries such as the Maldives and Kiribati in the era of global warming — a dire scenario that has forced leaders to plan for floating cities or consider moving their entire populations to neighboring countries. Most countries won't need to take such drastic steps to simply survive, but many more will similarly experience the uglier side of climate change.

    The countries potentially facing the worst fates may not necessarily experience the greatest climate change, but instead lack the resources to cushion their people against climate-related disasters such as hurricanes, floods, heat waves and droughts. That has historically made a huge difference in rates of death or displacement from such events — Hurricane Jeanne killed just three people in the U.S. in 2004, but resulted in the deaths of more than 1,500 people in Haiti and displaced about 200,000 Haitians.

    "This of course is different than future likelihood to suffer, but I believe that those who suffered most in the past are probably most vulnerable to future disasters, because they are unable to prepare for, cope with, and recover from these kinds of disasters," said J. Timmons Roberts, a professor of environmental studies and sociology at Brown University.

    The most fortunate countries could fortify themselves against the worst of climate change and possibly take in climate change refugees from other parts of the world. Both historical data and climate model predictions have given some idea of what to expect.

    Climate change hotspots

    North America, Europe and Asia can generally expect more severe heat waves and droughts alongside more intense storms related to flooding, said Michael Wehner, a climate scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California. On the other hand, cold snaps could become less severe.

    Other regions could see even more radical changes in their normal climates.

    "Central America, the Caribbean and the Mediterranean are projected to experience what is now considered drought as a new normal condition," Wehner told InnovationNewsDaily. "The impacts on agriculture could be severe, especially on impoverished nations."

    The melting Arctic is experiencing some of the greatest warming — often with devastating consequences for local wildlife and people — but climate change's greatest impact may take place in more densely populated regions. Jason Samson, a former Ph.D. candidate at McGill University in Canada, highlighted the relationship between climate conditions and population density in a 2011 paper published in the journal Global Ecology and Biogeography. [Sink or Swim: 6 Ways to Adapt to Climate Change]

    "Strongly negative impacts of climate change are predicted in Central America, central South America, the Arabian Peninsula, Southeast Asia and much of Africa," wrote Samson and his colleagues.

    That paper's findings echo the vulnerable regions identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — the Arctic, Africa, small islands (such as the Maldives and Kiribati), and the Asian and African megadeltas where huge cities filled with millions of people face rising seas, storm surges and flooding rivers.

    Countries in the danger zone

    So what countries face the greatest danger from climate change? Maplecroft, a British consultancy, has created a "Climate Change and Environment Risk Atlas," a list of 193 countries ranked by those most vulnerable to climate change because of factors such as population density or state of development.

    The 2012 edition of the risk atlas identified 30 countries as being at extreme risk. The top 10 most at risk include: Haiti, Bangladesh, Sierra Leone, Zimbabwe, Madagascar, Cambodia, Mozambique, Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi and the Philippines.

    Some countries with lower risk ratings still have danger zones that face "extreme risk" from climate change. Maplecroft pointed to the southwest of Brazil and China's coastal regions as examples, even though both countries rate as "medium risk" overall. Six of the world's fastest-growing cities also received "extreme risk" ratings: Calcutta in India, Manila in the Philippines, Jakarta in Indonesia, Dhaka and Chittagong in Bangladesh, and Addis Ababa in Ethiopia.

    The countries in the best position to adapt to climate change's challenges mostly include those in Northern Europe, such as Finland, Ireland, Sweden and Norway, CNN reported. Iceland topped the list, but the United States also had a relatively low risk rating.

    Living with climate change

    The climate risk assessments emphasized the wealth difference between the most and least vulnerable countries. That has proven historically true as well, Roberts said. He and a colleague, Bradley Parks, looked at 4,040 climate-related disasters from 1980 to 2003 in their book "A Climate of Injustice" (MIT Press, 2006).

    "The rates [of people killed or made homeless], when adjusted for population, were 100 times higher in some African and Pacific islands than in the USA," Roberts explained.

    But even developed countries such as the U.S. face risks when it comes to climate-related disasters — regardless of whatever future climate change may bring. Wehner suggested that climate change during his lifetime would be "manageable" as far as living in the U.S., but added that his grandchildren would face tougher choices.

    Roberts, who lives in Rhode Island on top of a hill near Narragansett Bay, took an even more cautious approach about buying beachfront property even in the U.S.

    "While I would love to look out over the water, I would think twice before buying land or property, and especially before putting my family right at sea level, in a place that may suffer storm surge," Roberts said.

    This story was provided by InnovationNewsDaily, a sister site to LiveScience. You can follow InnovationNewsDaily Senior Writer Jeremy Hsu on Twitter @ScienceHsu. Follow InnovationNewsDaily on Twitter @News_Innovation, or on Facebook.

    Copyright 2012 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
     

    151 comments

    • KarenM  •  Riverview, Florida  •  1 day 20 hrs ago
      don't trust people who make mega profits from pollution... they'll convince you that the research is wrong... but YOU GET TO BREATHE THIS STUFF.
      • doodada 20 hrs ago
        @Aaron: What does Brent going to "college" have to do with anything, stupid? Oh! Because you think he hasn't been sufficiently indoctrinated by leftist professors like you! 'Nuff said. BTW, I have a degree in Accounting, but I had to take the ubiquitous core classes that preach the evils of capitalism and the blessings of socialism. I questioned both the texts and my professors who were dipshits, and I still walked away with a 3.98/4 GPA. What was yours, genius? Oh, and what was your major, Lesbian Poetry Studies? You sound like it.

        And those "professors" get grants from both my government and other anti-capitalist interests to "find" what they want them to find. That's why the stupid Berkley "professor" found Mother Gaia and all of a sudden started believing in anthropogenic global warming. His grant from one of the Koch Brothers foundations ran out and was replaced by a grant from some broad living off her husband's success and is a rabid, guilty libtard. So yeah, their "findings" are based on the grantor, not real science. Wake the fvck up!
      • Ed H 21 hrs ago
        I guess Doodada has never seen the New river along the US border with Mexicali, or heard of Bhopal, or tried to eat fish out of the Rhine. Check out Guiyu, China and the toner ink poisoning of the water for the entire city of 500k. Industry makes a mess, fact of life, but rather than raise product price or spend a portion of profit to mitigate it is cheaper for consumers and industry to pollute. Mitigation or clean up or recylcing of waste is expensive.
      • doodada 22 hrs ago
        Who makes "mega profits" from pollution, stupid? I guess you think they don't live where they profit, or exactly how does that female brain of yours reconcile that discrepancy?
    • mertens266  •  Lafayette, Indiana  •  1 day 5 hrs ago
      Someone gets a cold in Haiti and it kills 12,000 people.
      • CameronS 10 hrs ago
        History denialism.
      • Tim 10 hrs ago
        not weather problem
      • CameronS 11 hrs ago
        It's a way of dismissing Haiti. Like AGW, a true understanding of how Haiti got the way it is threatens the self-image of a person raised on right wing propaganda.
    • jzostrianos  •  2 days 0 hrs ago
      Sorry to see Madagascar on the list. Lemurs are fellow primates and might just have to be airlifted to more secure locations. Thought maybe the Netherlands would be on the list, but maybe their centuries of work have given them some security against rising ocean levels.
      • brooke 1 day 0 hrs ago
        The scariest thing about global warming is the brain dead denial that will prevent us from doing anything to stop this destruction of the earth we live on.
      • KarenM 1 day 20 hrs ago
        thank you for the educational message ... yeah right!
    • 1776reloaded  •  1 hr 43 mins ago
      You doomsdayers never cease to crack me up.

      All climates change and global warming is nothing but a HOAX to ENSLAVE you.

      Research CCX (Chicago Climate Exchange) and you will see how Obama along with others are setting U.S. citizens up to enslave and tax the hell out of them on a LIE.

      Furthermore, If cap and tax gets passed it will be a 10 trillion a year profit for Obama. You useless idiots pushing this #$%$ should stop being so NAIVE, you're sheep being led to slaughter.

      Do you not have an ounce of sanity within your cult like utopia fantasy brains? Think for youself for once and stop being manipulated.
      • JOHNd 24 mins ago
        @1776reloaded Ever heard of projection? It's a psychological term that fits you like a charm. It's when you see in others and say about others things that really much better describe yourself:

        "naive",
        "sheep being let to slaughter"
        "fantasy brain"
        "stop being manipulated"
        "think for yourself"

        What's troublesome about our time, is that the very very rich have learned that they can create their very own version of the "news" to speak to folks like you. They pander to the fears and prejudices of the truly naive. Then they put up candidates that play to that angry crowd and actually get elected. Then incompetent and disinterested in true governance, they do the bidding of the very very rich and themselves, and screw both you and me. It works. And you are living in the angry, ignorant fantasy world they've created for you.
    • M W CHRISTOPHERSON  •  Burbank, California  •  11 hrs ago
      Wut country and CLIMATE CHANGE? wITH OUT A DOUBT ITWILL BE ALL THE freeloaders IN THE us as the climate in DC is changing even faster than predicted~
      GO R/R change the climate in DC
      • M W CHRISTOPHERSON 6 hrs ago
        Sure you can buy selling yourself to the PLANTATION master there in DC
      • CameronS 10 hrs ago
        DC has a Green-Statehood Party. California has a Green Party. You can escape the Businessmen's Party if you really want.
      • M W CHRISTOPHERSON 11 hrs ago
        @camerroon~yup you got that right
        ~cept thre are still lotsa libruls in that city~probably enuff to where the stink may still reside for anuthur 1000 years
    • Robb Sames  •  Washington, District of Columbia  •  2 days 8 hrs ago
      No matter what article about global warming I turn to, there is always a really high number of non believers posting (usually pretty nasty about it, as well). The number of commenters seems to be waaaay disproportionate to the number of believers/nonbelievers out in the real world according to public polling. So why is this? Why do so many naysayers specifically come to articles to spout their beliefs? Especially on a topic they view as fictional? These same people aren't out there commenting on articles about Santa Claus or alien visitations. Me thinks doth protest too much
    • Richard  •  2 days 4 hrs ago
      Earth's Energy Budget Remained Out of Balance Despite Unusually Low Solar Activity

      Jan. 30, 2012 from NASA

      "A new NASA study underscores the fact that greenhouse gases generated by human activity — not changes in solar activity — are the primary force driving global warming.-------

      The study offers an updated calculation of the Earth's energy imbalance, the difference between the amount of solar energy absorbed by Earth's surface and the amount returned to space as heat. The researchers' calculations show that, despite unusually low solar activity between 2005 and 2010, the planet continued to absorb more energy than it returned to space. .................

      Pinpointing the magnitude of Earth's energy imbalance is fundamental to climate science because it offers a direct measure of the state of the climate. Energy imbalance calculations also serve as the foundation for projections of future climate change. If the imbalance is positive and more energy enters the system than exits, Earth grows warmer. If the imbalance is negative, the planet grows cooler.

      "The fact that we still see a positive imbalance despite the prolonged solar minimum isn't a surprise given what we've learned about the climate system, but it's worth noting because this provides unequivocal evidence that the sun is not the dominant driver of global warming," Hansen said
    • Angie  •  2 days 1 hr ago
      It seems like you only hear about evolution when there's an argument with religious folks. Why not when it comes to practical matters like this?
    • Jim M  •  2 days 10 hrs ago
      Let me get this straight. The same countries that are at the most risk for famine, disease, and effects of flooding, hurricanes, and drought and have population management issues are also the ones that are at the most risk from "climate change"?

      I'm shocked. Shocked I say.
    • Richard  •  2 days 4 hrs ago
      Here are some books documenting the global warming denial misinformation PR machine and its history.

      "Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming"
      by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway

      "The Inquisition of Climate Science"
      by James Lawrence Powell

      "Climate Cover-Up": The Crusade to Deny Global Warming"
      by James Hoggan with Richard Littlemore

      "The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars"
      by Michael mann

      "Scorcher: The Dirty Politics of Climate Change" by Clive Hamilton
      He outlines the decade-long, coal-industry funded campaign in Australia to deny climate science.

      "Science as a Contact Sport: Inside the Battle to Save Earth's Climate"
      by Stephan H. Schneider and Tim Flannery

      "Global Warming and Political Intimidation, How Politicians Cracked Down On Scientists as the Earth Heated Up" by Raymond Bradley

      "Climate Change Denial, Heads in the Sand"
      by Hayden Washington and John Cook

      "The Heat Is On" and "The Boiling Point" by Ross Gelbspan

      Yes, the real scam is well documented, unlike the absurd conspiracy theories that deniers believe, which are based completely on conjecture and political ideology.
    • Francis  •  Newark, New Jersey  •  2 days 8 hrs ago
      The comments here show me some people will never trust science. Shows the problems with the American educational system.
    • anonymous  •  Raritan, New Jersey  •  2 days 9 hrs ago
      Biggest beneficiaries of federal flood insurance and disaster relief programs are the rich cats in their beach front mansions. Why sell, when the poor pay for the rich to rebuild.
    • Bobby  •  Washington, District of Columbia  •  2 days 8 hrs ago
      June, 2012 in the Geophysical Research Letters. A team lead by Olivier Henry of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique in Toulouse, France, examined 62 tide gauges along the coast of Norway to Russia over the last 62 years. The study yielded some surprising results. Beginning in 1950 Arctic sea level remained relatively stable. Sea level then began to rise in 1980 and reached a high point in 1990, which has yet to be surpassed.

      John Hannah and Robert Bell of the University of Otago and the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research respectively published a paper in January 2012 in the Journal of Geophysical Research. The new curves show that sea level rise has been steady since 1940. The development in New Zealand is similar to the global situation. The long-term New Zealand trend is 1.7 mm sea level rise per year.

      In January, 2012, an international team led by Roland Gehrels of the University of Plymouth published a new study in the Earth and Planetary Science Letters examining the sea level history of Tasmania. Using cores taken from salt marshes, they reconstructed sea level development for the last 6000 years. Sea level rose between 1900 and 1950 at a rate of 4.2 mm per year (Figure 6), but slowed down considerably in the second half of the 20th century to an average of only 0.7 mm per year - similar to southern New Zealand. No sea level rise acceleration is detectable in the Australian New Zealand region over the last decades. In fact, just the opposite is true. Sea level rise slowed down in the second half of the century.

      Simon Donner of the University of British Columbia closely examined sea level development for the last 20 years for the Japanese atoll Tarawa and published his findings in the journal Eos in April 2012. Now hold on to your seat: tide gauges show that the sea level around Tarawa did not rise at all during this period.

      In May, 2012, a study by Eduardo Leorri of East Carolina University appeared in the Quaternary Science Reviews. Examining sediment cores, the scientists studied sea level development of the Bay of Biscay for the period going back 10,000 years, sea level rise slowed down 7000 years ago. Leorri and his team compared the results to coastal tide gauge readings from the region for the last 200 years. From 1800 to 1900, sea level was stagnant. Then it began to rise around 1900. But no unusual acceleration can be detected over the last 30 years.
    • Smooth Criminal  •  2 days 1 hr ago
      @CameronS stated: "They've been predicting global warming for over a hundred years, and they were correct, it's happening."
      Give them the Nobel Prize - you didn't have to be Nostradamus to predict warming after the end of the LIA.
    • Richard  •  2 days 4 hrs ago
      Several recent peer reviewed studies show that If Not For - the enhanced greenhouse effect, from human emissions of CO2, the earth would have cooled over the past 40-50 years, as the net effect of all the natural forcings, that fake skeptics want you to believe are the real cause of global warming.
      --------

      Huber and Knutti Quantify Man-Made Global Warming

      "They take an approach in this study which utilizes the principle of conservation of energy for the global energy budget to determine and quantify the various contributions to the observed global warming since 1850 and 1950. Over both timeframes, the authors find that human greenhouse gas emissions are the dominant cause of global warming
      The authors also note that the relatively small contribution of natural variability to the observed long-term temperature change is consistent with past climate data........

      Since 1950, the authors find that greenhouse gases contributed 166% (120-215%) of the observed surface warming (0.85°C of 0.51°C estimated surface warming). The percentage is greater than 100% because aerosols offset approximately 44% (0.45°C) of that warming."

      {read at Skeptical Science}
      -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Foster and Rahmstorf Measure the Global Warming

      {Read it at Skeptical Science}

      "When the fluctuations in temperature over the last 32 years (which tend to obscure the continuation of the global warming trend) are accounted for, it becomes obvious that there has not been any cessation, or even any slowing, of global warming over the last decade (or at any time during this time span).

      In other words, any deviations from an unchanging linear warming trend are explained by the influence of ENSO, volcanoes and solar variability....It is worthy of note that for all five adjusted data sets, 2009 and 2010 are the two hottest years on record....All five data sets show statistically significant warming even for the time span from 2000 to the present."

      "exogenous factors contributed to very slight cooling of global temperatures over the past 32 years, with the execption of UAH, for which they have had no net impact on the trend. (note, UAH is one of several temp data sets)"
    • buggrthat  •  Panama City, Florida  •  1 day 22 hrs ago
      I see the Denialist pinheads are spewing the same old repetitive stupidity and lies. Most of it is too stupid and worn to comment on. They do seem to be surlier than usual, perhaps it is because too much reality continues to intrude into their little fantasy world on a non-stop basis. I guess it is a real bummer when reality doesn't support your fanatical politics.
    • R  •  1 day 20 hrs ago
      At first, Republicans denied climate change. Now that the evidence is overwhelming and even their pet scientists admit it is real, they have no choice but to acknowledge its existence. Now, they're moved on to the next phase of their denial: claiming that human activity has nothing to do with climate change. Eventually, of course, the evidence will overwhelm them (again) and they'll be forced to admit that they were wrong (again). In the meantime, while we could be acting to mitigate the effects, the Republicans will continue to block all efforts to do so. In short, the Republican party is once again sacrificing the future in order to continue lining their own pockets.
    • Richard  •  2 days 10 hrs ago
      Florida?
    • Genghis Can-Do  •  Fort Knox, Kentucky  •  2 days 9 hrs ago
      "WHICH Country faces the worst climate change?" Jeremy Hsu please learn english grammar?
    • A Yahoo! User  •  2 days 9 hrs ago
      Looks like we're gonna need another Timmy!