From the World Bank site:
South Asia is highly vulnerable to climate change. Average temperatures have been rising throughout the region, and rainfall has become more erratic. These changes are projected to continue accruing over the coming decades.South Asia’s Hotspots: The Impact of Temperature and Precipitation Changes on Living Standards is the first book of its kind to provide granular spatial analysis of the long-term impacts of changes in average temperature and precipitation on one of the world’s poorest regions. South Asia’s Hotspots finds that higher temperatures and shifting precipitation patterns will reduce living standards in communities across South Asia—locations that the book terms “hotspots.” More than 800 million people in South Asia currently live in communities that are projected to become hotspots under a carbon-intensive climate scenario. Global action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will reduce the severity of hotspots. Diverse and robust development is the best overall prescription to help people in hotspots. The book also suggests actions tailored to each country in the region—such as increasing employment in nonagricultural sectors, improving educational attainment, and expanding access to electricity— that would offset the declines in living standards associated with hotspots. South Asia’s Hotspots complements previous studies detailing the impacts of sea-level rise and extreme events on the people of South Asia. Together, these bodies of work create a sound analytical basis for investing in targeted policies and actions to build climate resilience throughout the region.
Litz v. Maryland Dep’t of Env’t, 446 Md. 254, 131 A.3d 923 (2016), reconsideration denied (Mar. 24, 2016) – It is possible for a plaintiff to state a claim for inverse condemnation by pleading governmental inaction in the face of an affirmative duty to act.
From the Opinion:
It may seem peculiar that an earlier order refused to remand this action to state court on the ground that plaintiffs’ claims were necessarily governed by federal law, while the current order concludes that federal common law should not be extended to provide relief. There is, however, no inconsistency. It remains proper for the scope of plaintiffs’ claims to be decided under federal law, given the international reach of the alleged wrong and given that the instrumentality of the alleged harm is the navigable waters of the United States. Although the scope of plaintiffs’ claims is determined by federal law, there are sound reasons why regulation of the worldwide problem of global warming should be determined by our political branches, not by our judiciary.
(Post under revision)
This case arose from claims brought by property owners in St. Bernard and New Orleans claiming that the MRGO (Mississippi River Gulf Outlet) canal increased the flooding from Hurricane Katrina and after. This is the same junk science that was used in the Katrina Levee Breech Cases, which were ultimately dismissed for FTCA immunity. These claims were an end run around the FTCA, claiming a constitutional taking, which does not have a discretionary authority defense. The Court of Claims ruled in favor of the property owners in: St. Bernard Par. Gov’t v. United States, 121 Fed. Cl. 687, 690-91 (2015). This was reversed and the claims dismissed by the Federal Circuit, which hears appeals from the Court of Claims:
This report looks at the legal implications as the mean high tide line – the demarcation between public and private land in California – moves inland with sea level rise.
(Student post from my coastal law class, 2010)
Dark tourism is tourism involving travel to sites associated with death and suffering. Thanatourism, derived from the Ancient Greek word thanatos for the personification of death, is associated with dark tourism but refers more specifically to violent death. Dark tourism and the dark tourists are motivated by death and disaster and apocalypse rather than by sun and sea and sand and pastoral living, with even ecotourism and adventure travel no longer stimulating enough.
Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry discussion lawsuit and explaining that climate change is a hoax and that sea level is rising. – Facebook video on the AG Facebook page.
The AG said that the sea level is not rising, but is declining – see the recording starting about 9:00 (-8.00 remaining). (He also said that he was an environmental sciences major at ULL, so we should believe him.) This is true if you look at the tide gauge in Juno, Alaska, where the land is still rapidly uplifting from the ice age. if you look at actual sea level rise, it is about 3.4mm a year, and the tide gauge at Grand Isle shows (relative) sea level rise of more than 9mm a year from the subsidence and sea level rise.