Hurricane Sandy and climate change

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/29/hurricane-sandy-cable-news-climate-change_n_2041434.html

Few people are talking about it. This presidential campaign is the first since the 1980's where the major candidates did not directly address climate change during the debates. It's not like the problem is any better now vs. Reagan's time. In fact it's terribly worse. But after Solyndra and the weak recovery, climate change is out of favor. Imagine all the debt associated with cleaning up after mega-storms like Katrina and Sandy. I'm not saying that smarter climate policy since the 1980's could have prevented those storms, but maybe it will prevent an even worse storm in 2050 (and mega-droughts in key farming/ranching areas, and capstone species loss, and sea level rise wiping out vital coastal real estate). At least spend more money on better storm protections, climate change response research, and emergency resources, instead of gutting funding so you can give tax breaks to hedge fund managers and big energy. Maybe then Cuba and Iran won't have to offer us assistance after a storm.

I feel bad for the damage and suffering in the northeast, but I think the media attention is disproportionate (as usual). Sandy = category 1 (75-90 mph winds), Katrina = category 5 (>157 mph). Sandy has killed 33 so far out of 50M affected residents. Katrina killed 1,800+ out of about 1M residents in the area. 5+ years later New Orleans still hasn't returned to pre-storm condition. They will clean up NYC in a month or less. But of course Katrina hit poor, backwards New Orleans, and Sandy hit the big cities "where things actually matter" (Arnold Rothstein, Boardwalk Empire) and where the media/money are located. Of course the loss of power to 8M households is a big deal, and the cost of Sandy's cleanup may eclipse that of Katrina, just because it affected a much larger area. Bottom line - both are terrible tragedies but the responses are different.

Gustav: a chance for government to earn back public trust

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/08/31/gustav/index.html

Before Katrina, the last major storm to hit New Orleans was 1965, before most of us were born. But now two "hundred year" hurricanes in a 3-year span... unbelievable. Some of the current evacuees haven't even received their Katrina checks yet, including my in-laws, and they have to do it all over again. It seems even more surreal and unlikely, because New Orleans is just a tiny target along the thousands of miles of hurricane-prone coast of the US Southeast. Yet it is a very sensitive target, because as we know 1/4 of US crude production occurs offshore, the city lies below sea level, it is not a wealthy area with tip top public services, and coastal wetlands that used to blunt incoming storms are getting washed away by the tides (partially due to human factors).

Obviously after the shame of Katrina, I think our elected officials and public servants will do everything in their power to redeem themselves and mount a near-flawless response. Though to be fair, many responders performed valiantly and above the call of duty during Katrina, but like the old quote from WWI, lions were led into battle by lambs, hence most of the problems. It's clear that LA's new governor Jindal isn't caught up with jurisdiction and other crap like his idiot predecessor Blanco. And half of the battle is already won, because the area was mostly evacuated in time. I guess that is a combination of the residents and officials taking the storm more seriously this time around. The people went through hell in 2005 and now have more motivation to leave, plus the government has provided better transport and coordination to facilitate a better evacuation. Though the highways are still jammed with many gas stations closed, so I don't know why the state police don't open up the shoulders and opposite lanes of traffic to increase flow.

But I really hope Bush and company will behave like the "compassionate conservatives" that they claimed to be in 2000, and redeem themselves after years of indifference to many Americans' suffering. They've already made contingency plans to miss/delay the RNC in Minnesota to visit the Gulf Coast, and that may actually work to their political advantage. Crises are occasions for politicians to "show leadership" and caring, and also tend to put voters in a more sympathetic, receptive mood. I think FEMA, Homeland Security, and Army Engineers have a lot to prove and more expectations on them this time around. They've had the Katrina case study and 3 years of planning to formulate better response plans and identify sensitive areas. But now they seem to be throwing a lot more resources at Gustav, and I hope it will pay off and reduce costs in the aftermath.

But in this charged political climate of blaming Bush for everything that's going wrong, and with two presidential candidates promoting change and Washington reform, I hope that a positive response to Gustav with help mend fences and restore some faith in our government. We all know that we are better than Katrina and should be better, so now is our chance to prove it.