Greenland is losing 30-41 (depending on author) MILLION TONS OF ICE PER HOUR. C3S estimates that 1.2 trillion tons of global ice are melting annually, so 3.3 billion tons per day, and at this rate 2/3rds of the ice held in the 220,000 glaciers worldwide will have melted by 2,100. Why? One pound of melting ice absorbs 144 BTUs of heat energy. You do the math. However, even the amazingly powerful hydrological cycle (melting ice-->water-->water vapor-->outer space) cannot keep up with our enormous heat energy imbalance: the heat energy equivalent of 20+ Hiroshima nuclear bomb blasts PER SECOND (Eliot Jacobson), where each one releases 63 trillion BTUs. Do you see why hurricane Helene has caused so much rain and flooding now? The global/Greenland melting ice is the proverbial "canary in the coal mine" warning of an existential threat to all life on this planet, and the truth will never cross the airways, if the MSM has control of our science reporting.
The comparison of Hiroshima bombs and heat being absorbed in the oceans truly blows my mind. I suspect you can do the math far better than I can, I am no physicist. Three years ago, I decided I needed to understand the climate emergency better and try to bridge the gap between dry scientific study which never gets communicated to the public or as you point out our corporate, billionaire owned media (and government) that has a vested interest in obscuring the truth. I wish in all this time I could have found something hopeful, but knowing human nature, didn't expect to. We are truly out of time and if there are survivors it will be on a vastly changed planet where the biggest blessing will be the unavailability of fossil fuels.
I had the same reaction to the heat energy imbalance expressed in Hiroshima nuclear bomb blasts that polymath Eliot Jacobson published a couple of months ago. Google his name for his website and publications on the net. He's a retired math prof, among many other things. Thanks for the feedback and the work you do! Gregg
Eliot was one of the people met on Twitter who made me feel I needed to do this work! Unfortunately, I can't be there under the new management, ugh. Glad you're finding my writing engaging.
Great article, you nailed it. Clear, concise, and excellent graphics.
We are on the same page. My last piece was on how the Boreal Zone (Forests + Permafrost) is a FRAGILE ARTIFACT of the Extreme Ice House climate we have been in for the last 800ky.
The Boreal Zone has acted as a planetary CSS system for 800ky. Now it's on FIRE.
Coming from you, Richard, with your handle on things is extra appreciated. Apparently, I didn't eff up. I feel a great responsibility when I write these articles. Thank you.
I listed a number of actions at the end of my article. The biggest one is to take to the streets. Organized, nationwide protests, boycotts, sickouts and walkouts are necessary. Bill McKibben's ThirdAct is a good choice for we older folk. Given the time element, joining existing organizations may be better than ground roots organizing. There are dangers, of course. In many red states, laws have been changed to make misdemeanors felonies, particularly protesting near oil infrastructure. In the UK, Roger Hallum recently received a five-year sentence for planning the blockade of a motorway. We saw the treatment and smearing of college protestors over the Gaza atrocities. We're dealing with powerful, ruthless people.
For me, getting arrested could be life-threatening. I had a brain tumor in 2019. Without medication, seizures are a real possibility.
Needless to say, most of the public has little clue of the gravity of our situation, the confluence of disasters coming together. Anyone taking a physical stand is taking a real risk, but I don't see any other way.
I fear the populace here is exhausted from just trying to survive, uninformed of what's taking place, and waiting for someone else to solve our problems. The problem is, those who created and make money from the problems are in charge.
I'm not looking for this and that to do, granted that we all need to be activists, but I'm looking to turn our whole mind field around. That involves collective action that no one is initiating! Follow me so you see what I'm up to. There are ideas you won't find elsewhere.
One feature of rising sea levels is that every metre rise dislodges other semi-floating ice shelves from their anchoring rocks, and that accelerates the movement and potentially the collapse of adjacent glaciers. On that basis I would suggest that a metre of sea level rise from melting Greenland ice will possibly trigger another metre from other ocean ice, such as in Antartica.
Secondly, I no longer envisage mitigation or policy changes that can work. You say yourself that the Greenland situation is already set in stone - we are just living though the time lag between 421ppm CO2 levels and the commensurate 7 metre sea level rise, which is now inevitable, as will be all the other knock on effects, such as above, and albedo, and methane emissions, and all the other warming sources and feedbacks.
I also see absolutely no meaningful impact from any climate conference decisions, pledges or promises, or carbon taxes, or carbon capture, or renewables, or government programs....... fossil fuel use is still rising, CO2 emissions are rising, methane emissions are rising fast, forests are being destroyed and no longer absorbing CO2, oceans are heating and no longer absorbing CO2. And perhaps most of all, at least half of all peoples in all the developed and developing nations that produce 95% of the emissions do NOT want to change what they are doing now, and will not vote to change it in the future either.
It is what it is. Personal survival (if such a thing may be possible) is increasingly the only reasonable response.
Thank you. It's not exactly enjoyable writing some of these articles.
I'm unsure of how Greenland ice melt might affect Antarctica, however the Thwaites Glacier appears to be doomed as well with cascading effects I would imagine, but I haven't studied that specifically yet.
I have to agree the climate conferences, pledges, etc., now mean little. James Hansen thinks that geoengineering is necessary now for any chance to save ourselves.
And I agree, the people who do not wish to change their ways have no intention of doing so. I often wonder if they see the solution to climate change and overshoot as the radical reduction of population by any methods available. I wrote an article about that a while back, and sadly have seen nothing since to change my suspicion.
Regarding, " I often wonder if they see the solution to climate change and overshoot as the radical reduction of population by any methods available.".
I certainly have come to that conclusion, not least as a long-time follower of Dr. James Lovelock's Gaia Theory that proposes the Gaian Earth will impose 'corrections' on aberrant behaviours by an out-of-control species, such as humans now. As I have said before, the Earth's population has more than tripled in my single lifetime, and each of those humans on average consumes at least three times what they used to consume. Pretty much the definition of runaway exponential growth.
All that said, I find very few people seem to share such an academic solution. I get very, very few knowledgable responses, or approvals, or even acceptances. Just nothing. So I now conclude that the vast majority of people really don't want to know, and if they know they don't take it seriously, or if they think it serious, they think there is nothing they can do about it, or if they think they could change things, they want everyone else to change first!
In short, they don't give a shit!
So here we are, spectators, watching and recording the path to disaster that the majority aren't apparently interested in, or are hiding from.
I like to say I have a front table seat booked in The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe, à la Douglas Adams and Hitchhikers Guide. But the big difference - in the books The End was repeated night after night. For us, we are much more exclusive - we get those prime seats For One Night Only! 🙂
Yes, the planet will find balance, it just likely won't include us, or just a handful of us scraping by in extremely tough conditions.
Personally, I don't care to be part of that, but I am old enough to feel that way.
The modest community I have created here is about the only thing that keeps me sane. The circus we're presented with is destructive, meaningless, and easy to see through. Most people are unhappy with the status quo, but are too uneducated to understand why we're here or who the real enemies are.
I, too, feel like a spectator. That detachment also likely keeps me sane, if lonely as well.
My social life is a separate thing to the stuff I read and occasionally share on here.
Whilst i have owned and lived in many houses, I favour living on boats because it is always much more sociable and friendly, and you meet all kinds of unusual people. In this little French port my neighbours include; a millionaire ex-aircraft engineer, the owner of an international opticians chain, a couple of professional musicians, a few long distance and round the world sailors, a world renowned archeologist, a hotel owner with a large collection of vintage cars and motorbikes, etc. Etc....
It is also pleasantly transitory. People move on, people arrive. I'm thinking of moving on myself next year to another, bigger port in a university town.
I do think it is important not to be too immersed in one's work interest or it can become overwhelming. We all need to balance it with some play sometimes. For me it is the yacht, walking with my dog, playing with a couple of old cars and bikes, and some travelling, mostly in France. But also a morning coffee with neighbours, and just walking around chatting to people. Simple things to remind me that ordinary life goes on (right up to the time it doesn't!) 🙂
Great article. Well researched. I wonder though why fossil fuels are the target when animal agriculture is equally as damaging and easier to eradicate. None of us actually need animal products and animal agriculture is the leading AVOIDABLE cause of the world’s climate crisis. Vegan yet? If not, why not?
Thank you, I do research hard. Opinions mean nothing without facts. Animal agriculture is a huge emissions problem, particularly beef as I am sure you know which also drives deforestation in the Amazon. The conditions for animals are inhumane, and for the workers, too. I can't claim to be vegan yet, but dropped beef and pork eons ago. I eat a vegetarian diet 3 or 4 times a week, so I could do better.
You might be interested in this story that covers who the biggest purchasers of beef are, and how McDonalds rose up. The fast food industry accounts for a lot of the problems.
Maybe a restricted view but here I see vegetarian equally as debilitating as those that include meat. Dairy requires separation of mother from child and eggs in abundance rely upon inbred incarcerated laying hens. We all know what happens to the boys m. The majority of vegans have realized animal agriculture relies on cruelty. It’s coincidental that we have a lower footprint and are healthier.
You don't have a clue of what you're talking about. The speed of the melt is unprecedented. Even when presented with science, people like you deny reality. Conversing with you is not worth my time.
So you're not allowed to install erosion control to protect your home (even temporary it appears from another article) https://spectrumlocalnews.com/hi/hawaii/news/2023/12/08/sunset-beach-property-owner-fined, but when it falls into the ocean it's your a fault, and you're liable for the mess you've caused. Maybe this logic could be applied to the residents of burned out Lahaina as well.
The TRO was initially protection against physical violence. A judge reviews the accusation and either approves or disapproves based on no evidence. It then goes to core for a pre-trial hearing and his either just missed or brought to trial. The pre-trials usually within seven days and then the actual court trial 30 days. In this case the owner is denied access to his property immediately. It appears that the state is already clearing the property without his permission or supervision. There are also charging him for the work being done.
It's also a fact that the state had to approve building permits for building this close to the shore and are not being held accountable. The realtors will not be held responsible either. The restraining order will prevent him from retrieving any property that still salvageable. In a larger view this is similar to what the homeless are experiencing. What meager belongings they have are being stolen by the state. No trial held and constitutional rights violated.
The state will not be held responsible for allowing it to occur or preventing him from attempting to protect his property. The state should never have allowed the building to be built that close to the shoreline. There are also many other homes and similar situations.
As to Lahaina the wildfire was caused by the counties and action for clearing the grass that caused the fire. Over six years ago the residents of Lahaina were urging the county to remove the grass because of the potential of a wildfire. But the county did nothing. This is something that the papers and media have conveniently ignored. Instead the blame is put on the electric company for starting the fire.
It's going to be interesting to see what happens in Florida where all the houses were wiped out from storm surge. The state should not allow buildings that close to the high tide mark. It's really all a matter about money for realtors and the state since shore frontage is so valuable. Short-term profits for realtors and tax money for the state.
So this situation is a good indication of have the government is going to handle climate change. Temporary restraining orders can be used to prevent you from accessing your own property.
In Kailua Kona (the main hub of the tourist trap) over the last 5 to 10 years houses have been built less than 5 to 10 ft above high tide mark. Probably worth 1 to 2 million dollars each or more. A small tsunami will guarantee their destruction as well as a hurricane. But in the meantime it does help create the illusion of paradise. Good for tourists and the tourist industry. Helping to perpetuate the homeless situation from unlivable poverty wages.
The malevolence of government on homeowners plays out all the time. A drainage problem on a main road here flooded the basement of my sister and husband's home and the backyard of a duplex they bought (for their daughter because kids can't afford homes anymore) numerous times. The town refuses to fix the problem. When the town plants trees at the curb, and they grow large and the roots raise the sidewalk, the homeowner is charged for the repairs.
Anyone building a home in harms way is an idiot at this point, but yeah, permitting them is equally dumb. As always, it's about short term money making, not long term sustainable thinking.
I fear for the survivors of Helene with their property and lives destroyed, mostly uninsured for flooding. The crisis caused by global warming affects more people every day, a slow crawl to collapse destined to hit critical mass at some point. Insurers pulling out of markets and raising rates to unaffordability are early signs. The homeless situation is bound to worsen.
At least we have plenty of money for bombs for Netanyahu.
Greenland is losing 30-41 (depending on author) MILLION TONS OF ICE PER HOUR. C3S estimates that 1.2 trillion tons of global ice are melting annually, so 3.3 billion tons per day, and at this rate 2/3rds of the ice held in the 220,000 glaciers worldwide will have melted by 2,100. Why? One pound of melting ice absorbs 144 BTUs of heat energy. You do the math. However, even the amazingly powerful hydrological cycle (melting ice-->water-->water vapor-->outer space) cannot keep up with our enormous heat energy imbalance: the heat energy equivalent of 20+ Hiroshima nuclear bomb blasts PER SECOND (Eliot Jacobson), where each one releases 63 trillion BTUs. Do you see why hurricane Helene has caused so much rain and flooding now? The global/Greenland melting ice is the proverbial "canary in the coal mine" warning of an existential threat to all life on this planet, and the truth will never cross the airways, if the MSM has control of our science reporting.
The comparison of Hiroshima bombs and heat being absorbed in the oceans truly blows my mind. I suspect you can do the math far better than I can, I am no physicist. Three years ago, I decided I needed to understand the climate emergency better and try to bridge the gap between dry scientific study which never gets communicated to the public or as you point out our corporate, billionaire owned media (and government) that has a vested interest in obscuring the truth. I wish in all this time I could have found something hopeful, but knowing human nature, didn't expect to. We are truly out of time and if there are survivors it will be on a vastly changed planet where the biggest blessing will be the unavailability of fossil fuels.
I had the same reaction to the heat energy imbalance expressed in Hiroshima nuclear bomb blasts that polymath Eliot Jacobson published a couple of months ago. Google his name for his website and publications on the net. He's a retired math prof, among many other things. Thanks for the feedback and the work you do! Gregg
Eliot was one of the people met on Twitter who made me feel I needed to do this work! Unfortunately, I can't be there under the new management, ugh. Glad you're finding my writing engaging.
Great article, you nailed it. Clear, concise, and excellent graphics.
We are on the same page. My last piece was on how the Boreal Zone (Forests + Permafrost) is a FRAGILE ARTIFACT of the Extreme Ice House climate we have been in for the last 800ky.
The Boreal Zone has acted as a planetary CSS system for 800ky. Now it's on FIRE.
Coming from you, Richard, with your handle on things is extra appreciated. Apparently, I didn't eff up. I feel a great responsibility when I write these articles. Thank you.
The boreal situation is truly frightening.
My Substack is Now What? Soooo, now what? That is, other than subscribe to you that I've already urged my several thousand subscribers to do.
Bypassing two years of particular ideas I could point to, what's up for me is to scheme with people as smart and as wise as you are!
"The urgency of NOW/Searching for what to do": https://substack.com/@suzannetaylor/p-146883261
I listed a number of actions at the end of my article. The biggest one is to take to the streets. Organized, nationwide protests, boycotts, sickouts and walkouts are necessary. Bill McKibben's ThirdAct is a good choice for we older folk. Given the time element, joining existing organizations may be better than ground roots organizing. There are dangers, of course. In many red states, laws have been changed to make misdemeanors felonies, particularly protesting near oil infrastructure. In the UK, Roger Hallum recently received a five-year sentence for planning the blockade of a motorway. We saw the treatment and smearing of college protestors over the Gaza atrocities. We're dealing with powerful, ruthless people.
For me, getting arrested could be life-threatening. I had a brain tumor in 2019. Without medication, seizures are a real possibility.
Needless to say, most of the public has little clue of the gravity of our situation, the confluence of disasters coming together. Anyone taking a physical stand is taking a real risk, but I don't see any other way.
I fear the populace here is exhausted from just trying to survive, uninformed of what's taking place, and waiting for someone else to solve our problems. The problem is, those who created and make money from the problems are in charge.
I'm not looking for this and that to do, granted that we all need to be activists, but I'm looking to turn our whole mind field around. That involves collective action that no one is initiating! Follow me so you see what I'm up to. There are ideas you won't find elsewhere.
Very good article, thanks!
A couple of comments:
One feature of rising sea levels is that every metre rise dislodges other semi-floating ice shelves from their anchoring rocks, and that accelerates the movement and potentially the collapse of adjacent glaciers. On that basis I would suggest that a metre of sea level rise from melting Greenland ice will possibly trigger another metre from other ocean ice, such as in Antartica.
Secondly, I no longer envisage mitigation or policy changes that can work. You say yourself that the Greenland situation is already set in stone - we are just living though the time lag between 421ppm CO2 levels and the commensurate 7 metre sea level rise, which is now inevitable, as will be all the other knock on effects, such as above, and albedo, and methane emissions, and all the other warming sources and feedbacks.
I also see absolutely no meaningful impact from any climate conference decisions, pledges or promises, or carbon taxes, or carbon capture, or renewables, or government programs....... fossil fuel use is still rising, CO2 emissions are rising, methane emissions are rising fast, forests are being destroyed and no longer absorbing CO2, oceans are heating and no longer absorbing CO2. And perhaps most of all, at least half of all peoples in all the developed and developing nations that produce 95% of the emissions do NOT want to change what they are doing now, and will not vote to change it in the future either.
It is what it is. Personal survival (if such a thing may be possible) is increasingly the only reasonable response.
Thank you. It's not exactly enjoyable writing some of these articles.
I'm unsure of how Greenland ice melt might affect Antarctica, however the Thwaites Glacier appears to be doomed as well with cascading effects I would imagine, but I haven't studied that specifically yet.
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/antarctica-thwaites-glacier-ice-shelf-collapse-climate-5-years
I have to agree the climate conferences, pledges, etc., now mean little. James Hansen thinks that geoengineering is necessary now for any chance to save ourselves.
https://time.com/6330957/james-hansen-climate-warning-geoengineering-study/
Yes, land carbon sinks appear saturated, and I suspect the oceans are as well.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/14/nature-carbon-sink-collapse-global-heating-models-emissions-targets-evidence-aoe
And I agree, the people who do not wish to change their ways have no intention of doing so. I often wonder if they see the solution to climate change and overshoot as the radical reduction of population by any methods available. I wrote an article about that a while back, and sadly have seen nothing since to change my suspicion.
https://geoffreydeihl.substack.com/p/circumstantial-evidence
Regarding, " I often wonder if they see the solution to climate change and overshoot as the radical reduction of population by any methods available.".
I certainly have come to that conclusion, not least as a long-time follower of Dr. James Lovelock's Gaia Theory that proposes the Gaian Earth will impose 'corrections' on aberrant behaviours by an out-of-control species, such as humans now. As I have said before, the Earth's population has more than tripled in my single lifetime, and each of those humans on average consumes at least three times what they used to consume. Pretty much the definition of runaway exponential growth.
All that said, I find very few people seem to share such an academic solution. I get very, very few knowledgable responses, or approvals, or even acceptances. Just nothing. So I now conclude that the vast majority of people really don't want to know, and if they know they don't take it seriously, or if they think it serious, they think there is nothing they can do about it, or if they think they could change things, they want everyone else to change first!
In short, they don't give a shit!
So here we are, spectators, watching and recording the path to disaster that the majority aren't apparently interested in, or are hiding from.
I like to say I have a front table seat booked in The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe, à la Douglas Adams and Hitchhikers Guide. But the big difference - in the books The End was repeated night after night. For us, we are much more exclusive - we get those prime seats For One Night Only! 🙂
Yes, the planet will find balance, it just likely won't include us, or just a handful of us scraping by in extremely tough conditions.
Personally, I don't care to be part of that, but I am old enough to feel that way.
The modest community I have created here is about the only thing that keeps me sane. The circus we're presented with is destructive, meaningless, and easy to see through. Most people are unhappy with the status quo, but are too uneducated to understand why we're here or who the real enemies are.
I, too, feel like a spectator. That detachment also likely keeps me sane, if lonely as well.
My social life is a separate thing to the stuff I read and occasionally share on here.
Whilst i have owned and lived in many houses, I favour living on boats because it is always much more sociable and friendly, and you meet all kinds of unusual people. In this little French port my neighbours include; a millionaire ex-aircraft engineer, the owner of an international opticians chain, a couple of professional musicians, a few long distance and round the world sailors, a world renowned archeologist, a hotel owner with a large collection of vintage cars and motorbikes, etc. Etc....
It is also pleasantly transitory. People move on, people arrive. I'm thinking of moving on myself next year to another, bigger port in a university town.
I do think it is important not to be too immersed in one's work interest or it can become overwhelming. We all need to balance it with some play sometimes. For me it is the yacht, walking with my dog, playing with a couple of old cars and bikes, and some travelling, mostly in France. But also a morning coffee with neighbours, and just walking around chatting to people. Simple things to remind me that ordinary life goes on (right up to the time it doesn't!) 🙂
Great article. Well researched. I wonder though why fossil fuels are the target when animal agriculture is equally as damaging and easier to eradicate. None of us actually need animal products and animal agriculture is the leading AVOIDABLE cause of the world’s climate crisis. Vegan yet? If not, why not?
Thank you, I do research hard. Opinions mean nothing without facts. Animal agriculture is a huge emissions problem, particularly beef as I am sure you know which also drives deforestation in the Amazon. The conditions for animals are inhumane, and for the workers, too. I can't claim to be vegan yet, but dropped beef and pork eons ago. I eat a vegetarian diet 3 or 4 times a week, so I could do better.
You might be interested in this story that covers who the biggest purchasers of beef are, and how McDonalds rose up. The fast food industry accounts for a lot of the problems.
https://geoffreydeihl.substack.com/p/cheeseburger-freedom
Maybe a restricted view but here I see vegetarian equally as debilitating as those that include meat. Dairy requires separation of mother from child and eggs in abundance rely upon inbred incarcerated laying hens. We all know what happens to the boys m. The majority of vegans have realized animal agriculture relies on cruelty. It’s coincidental that we have a lower footprint and are healthier.
get over it … its happened 5 times before in the last 10000 years so its natural.
You don't have a clue of what you're talking about. The speed of the melt is unprecedented. Even when presented with science, people like you deny reality. Conversing with you is not worth my time.
Oh you again. Put your lips together.
Thought you might like this -
https://spectrumlocalnews.com/hi/hawaii/news/2024/09/28/temporary-restraining-order-north-shore-property-owner
Hawaii keeps getting "extreme high tide warnings with possible coastal flooding " and this is the government answer.
So you're not allowed to install erosion control to protect your home (even temporary it appears from another article) https://spectrumlocalnews.com/hi/hawaii/news/2023/12/08/sunset-beach-property-owner-fined, but when it falls into the ocean it's your a fault, and you're liable for the mess you've caused. Maybe this logic could be applied to the residents of burned out Lahaina as well.
It raises all sorts of interesting questions.
The TRO was initially protection against physical violence. A judge reviews the accusation and either approves or disapproves based on no evidence. It then goes to core for a pre-trial hearing and his either just missed or brought to trial. The pre-trials usually within seven days and then the actual court trial 30 days. In this case the owner is denied access to his property immediately. It appears that the state is already clearing the property without his permission or supervision. There are also charging him for the work being done.
It's also a fact that the state had to approve building permits for building this close to the shore and are not being held accountable. The realtors will not be held responsible either. The restraining order will prevent him from retrieving any property that still salvageable. In a larger view this is similar to what the homeless are experiencing. What meager belongings they have are being stolen by the state. No trial held and constitutional rights violated.
The state will not be held responsible for allowing it to occur or preventing him from attempting to protect his property. The state should never have allowed the building to be built that close to the shoreline. There are also many other homes and similar situations.
As to Lahaina the wildfire was caused by the counties and action for clearing the grass that caused the fire. Over six years ago the residents of Lahaina were urging the county to remove the grass because of the potential of a wildfire. But the county did nothing. This is something that the papers and media have conveniently ignored. Instead the blame is put on the electric company for starting the fire.
It's going to be interesting to see what happens in Florida where all the houses were wiped out from storm surge. The state should not allow buildings that close to the high tide mark. It's really all a matter about money for realtors and the state since shore frontage is so valuable. Short-term profits for realtors and tax money for the state.
So this situation is a good indication of have the government is going to handle climate change. Temporary restraining orders can be used to prevent you from accessing your own property.
In Kailua Kona (the main hub of the tourist trap) over the last 5 to 10 years houses have been built less than 5 to 10 ft above high tide mark. Probably worth 1 to 2 million dollars each or more. A small tsunami will guarantee their destruction as well as a hurricane. But in the meantime it does help create the illusion of paradise. Good for tourists and the tourist industry. Helping to perpetuate the homeless situation from unlivable poverty wages.
The malevolence of government on homeowners plays out all the time. A drainage problem on a main road here flooded the basement of my sister and husband's home and the backyard of a duplex they bought (for their daughter because kids can't afford homes anymore) numerous times. The town refuses to fix the problem. When the town plants trees at the curb, and they grow large and the roots raise the sidewalk, the homeowner is charged for the repairs.
Anyone building a home in harms way is an idiot at this point, but yeah, permitting them is equally dumb. As always, it's about short term money making, not long term sustainable thinking.
I fear for the survivors of Helene with their property and lives destroyed, mostly uninsured for flooding. The crisis caused by global warming affects more people every day, a slow crawl to collapse destined to hit critical mass at some point. Insurers pulling out of markets and raising rates to unaffordability are early signs. The homeless situation is bound to worsen.
At least we have plenty of money for bombs for Netanyahu.