Browsing through The Star Newspaper today (23rd March 2010), i came across an article at the environment section highlighting on the effect of climate change towards the native villages located at the north pole. This article was written by a villager (Newtok tribal administrator) that has grown up watching the changes in his village due to climate change.
This village lies few metres beneath Alaska's tundra, a layer of frozen soil called permafrost. In years the icy soils has provided a foundation for buildings and sturdy buffer against the sea.
However the climate at Alaska is getting hotter, the permafrost is melting and the foundation under Newtok is crumbling, the community hall have buckled and started to sink into the muddy earth. The water is rising at a rate of up to 27m a year. Some villages have faced erosion as fast as 33m a year.
Newtok is not the only village facing this problem, there are more than 200 native Alaskan villages have problems with flooding and erosion and these villages have been erected to explore relocation. The article have stated that rising seas are affecting other parts of the world, including the Pankhali region in Bangladesh and the islands nations of Maldives and Tuvalu and respective governments are now considering wholesale migration as a matter of public safety.
The united nations have estimated 150 million people could become "environmental refugees" by 2050. The article had claimed every person who drives a car, used electricity are responsible for the warming climate, so does oil, gas and coal companies that profit from the release of heat trapping gasses. The article had also blamed the government who fail to act before these climate change hit their homes. Do you agree with the blame? i agree with it...'environmental refugees' are purely generated due our selfishness and greediness. we were not aware of our contribution to climate change and global warming until we hear a news on how innocent people are facing the consequences. How could this be fair.....I feel it is merely unfair for the villagers. it is not their mistake to be residents of the icy cold areas and at the same time they are not the contributors of global warming due to establishment of industries (oil, gas and coal) for them to face the consequences. The touching part of it are the children living in these locations.
These people deserve justice, however, the government is struggling to determine which are the agencies should pay for relocation because of high cost of moving communities. The government has not developed effective ways to protect communities at risk from climate change.
Newtok lies on the Ninglick River near Alaska's west coast, 640km from the nearest road.As the plane circles to land, it is plain to see the waters of Ninglick River encroaching on the village as result of increased temperatures and rising sea levels in the nearby Bering Sea, from which the river flows.
it has been decided that the entire village to be relocated to a grassy hillside on Nelson Island, 14.4 km upstream, but moving a village is very costly (between US$80mil and US$130 million). It is always an unanswered question on who should bear this cost. No doubt most public support is only available in the form of reconstruction or post disaster relief, however this public support and reconstruction is no use to communities living through slow ongoing disaster..... Will these affected people receive aid and a new living...or these innocent people going to be neglected and left to be victims of climate warming, an ongoing disaster.
Life need to be saved. These people deserve to live a happy life, free from disaster. If it is necessary for them to be relocated and it has to be carried out immediately. If the particular government can't afford, all the other countries of the world need to give a hand as climate change and global warming were contributed collectively. Money is being spent to establish new technologies to overcome climate change and global warming. Although new technologies are important, this issue also has to be given importance as living people have already started to face its consequences.This is my opinion, please state your opinions too......
Panimalar Baskaran
This is an article from News21/McClatchy-Tribune Information Services - The Star 23rd March 2010 (Environment)
ReplyDeletethere is many people out there that does not alert at all about the consequences they are facing ait..agree?
ReplyDeletelast night (27/03/2010-8.30 to 9.30 pm) was the earth hour,the government launch a campaign to put off the light for one hour but it seems many of us does not support this campaign. is there any way we should do to support this kind of go green campaign?i think many of the us rather put our lights on than being "live in the dark" for an hour..especially the mall and who those opened a restaurant..who's on earth want to eat and shop in the dark???maybe thats what they all think..
i just want to say: Earth needs 1 green heart from everyone, not 1 hour or 1 Malaysia.
ReplyDeletei agree........ how i hour is effective to safe the climate change. I can accept that this is a form of awareness, however how many people are aware of participating and ensure that the climate change is reduced. i feel rather that importance and awareness are given to climate change, importance are only given to beneficial needs of people for example people are not willing to be in dark for one hour for the importance of climate change. this also can be seen in tourism where all light includng building light, street light, everything is lighted up just to keep the city lively.Kulla Lumpur is advertised as the city of lights and as how we see in our streets everyday. have they ever thought about the amount of energy being used and its consequences towards towards the climate change. how can implementation is being practiced in person when there is no awareness interm of country and government. it wont be relevant when we just quote and say it. it has to be implemented and practiced whole heartedly.No one is ever bothered bout the climate warming, environmental refugees or the animals. everyone is only concern about their personal needs and for those who lack of education, they dont even know what is purpose of environment and the problems being faced by the environment......
ReplyDeleteThe Star paper stated of population in Alaska, Maldives and Tuvalu undergo rapid changes in their environmental fighting of climate change may be one of the very less incident happen in world fighting global warming. The issue of Haiti and Madeira respectively, undergo the same things (tsunami and high flood) which in matter of facts, this phenomenon contributed by the other side of the world. Peoples who everyday using transport of burning petrol, or involves in coal and gas burning to gain benefits, perhaps did not aware of the matter now.
ReplyDeleteHave you ever imagined, working hard every day to earn money for living in industrial such as coal burning or burning fuel? And plus still don’t care about other people suffer because of you? I am not encouraging you to resign or whatever, the guilt feeling may come if you see others suffer as you just ignore it. Back to our friend in Alaska, every year, they have to migrate to higher places, recommended around 14.5km higher up from the sea. What you feel when things happens to you, like they face? Do you realize the feeling to migrate every year plus to fear you will die the next day?
Global warming cannot be ignore forever, the effect changes everything, the weather and world ecology. It takes just few years or decades to have everybody undergo the same way as people in Alaska experience. Changes in temperature, may cause changes in pressure, causes floods and storms extreme phenomenon in the area which does not experience any of this things. The geographical distribution of vector borne diseases such as malaria, cholera and meningitis in general, increase the warmth and moisture would enhance transmission of vector borne disease.
Malaysia government has restricted the low carbon emission towards 2020 and the 40% low carbon emission might help things a little, but the way to achieve it is still in progress. People can talk, but the action is still in question. A lot of money has to be spent on environment issue, plus can we spent without achieving something concrete? Spent to gain something are the way people thinks, spent on a raw material to get desired end products is the main principle, but spent on environmental issue? I doubt we can do it without any restriction or strong legislation and can legislation hold up the industry’s activities? Let me know if Malaysian government ever has good practice in uphold in its legislation as leniency may take place when come to up hold the legislation. As example the smoking campaign, failure as ever plus the government cannot take down the cigarette industry as it contributes to high export in Malaysia’s net income economy.
Life is cruel as ever. Free from disaster is impossible as where ever we go, even to highest peak in the world, or to the deepest place in the sea, it still come to hunt us as the reconstruction is no use to communities living through slow ongoing disaster. The government should not be blame as whole, as the main thing is to find the best way to face it. Collective contribution on mitigate the green house emissions and adaptation to already inevitable effects of climate change have become the primary steps to us in facing it. Like Nabil said ”Lu fikir la sendiri” but for me, let us fikir together. .