Pentagon går imod Trump: USA’s militærbaser er truet af klimaforandringer

Pentagon går imod Trump: USA’s militærbaser er truet af klimaforandringer

men en undersøgelse fra Pentagon viser nu, at halvdelen af USA’s militærbaser verden over er truet af klimaforandringer.

Nearly half of US military sites are threatened by wild weather linked to climate change, according to a new Pentagon study whose findings run contrary to White House views on global warming.

The findings put the military at odds with Donald Trump, who has repeatedly cast doubt on mainstream scientific findings about climate change, including this week during an interview on British television.

Det lyder jo som en rapport der seriøst sparker røv.

Der er bare et problem. Der er ikke noget belæg for de påstande i rapporten.

Rapporten siger ikke at klimaet har ændret sig.

Rapporten siger at USA's militær er blevet bedt af den amerikanske kongress om at undersøge klimaets betydning for forsvaret:

Senate Report 114-67 accompanying the fiscal year 2016 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies appropriations bill included language directing the DoD to include an assessment of coastal erosion and potential flooding risks in the siting of proposed military construction projects. In a July 23, 2015, report to Congress regarding the security implications of climate-related risks, the Department noted that is has directed a global screening level assessment to determine installation vulnerabilities to climate-related security risks with the goal of identifying serious vulnerabilities and developing necessary adaptation strategies. The Committee directed the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees not later than 120 days after enactment of this act, describing the results or the status of the vulnerability assessment, the adaptation strategies developed for vulnerable installations, and the estimated costs associated with implementing these strategies.

The Department of Defense (DoD) has significant experience in planning for and managing risk and uncertainty. The effects of climate and extreme weather represent additional risks to incorporate into the Department’s various planning and risk management processes. Various studies have identified a broad range of effects that could impact our ability to fully execute the Defense mission of protecting and maintaining the security interests of the United States at home and around the world.

Og selvfølgelig gør de som de er blevet bedt om. Så de laver en undersøgelse.

The web-based survey was developed in concert with the Military Services, Defense Logistics Agency and Washington Headquarters Services, as the infrastructure owning/managing components. Qualitative survey questions were framed to begin to identify sites with current weather-related effects and where more comprehensive assessment may be needed in order to identify potential effects of extreme weather. The survey questions focused on observed effects from past severe weather events (which may be indicative of more frequent and/or more severe future conditions), and the proximity of site acreage to any flood-prone areas. The survey asked respondents to identify any negative effects they may have experienced from extreme weather effects, both on the assets on the DoD site itself as well as any observed effects on similar assets in the surrounding community that provided supporting services (e.g., utilities, transportation, emergency response) for the DoD site. These included:
• Flooding due to storm surge
• Flooding due to non-storm surge events (e.g., rain, snow, sleet, ice, river overflow)
• Extreme temperatures (both hot and cold)
• Wind
• Drought
• Wildfire

Og svarene fortalte at de faktisk var blevet påvirket at disse.

The SLVAS responses yielded a wide range of qualitative information. The highest number of reported effects resulted from drought (782) followed closely by wind (763) and non-storm surge related flooding (706). About 10% of sites indicated being affected by extreme temperatures (351), while flooding due to storm surge (225) and wildfire (210) affected about 6% of the sites reporting. Nearly 50% of sites (1,684) reported they had no effects to any assets from the effects.

Masser af tørke, vindskader, oversvømmelser, skovbrande etc..

Der er ikke noget i rapporten som siger at antallet af disse er stigende.

Der er ikke noget i rapporten som siger at disse skyldes global opvarming.

Jeg tror absolut på at Trump er uening med The Guardian og newz.dk.

Men jeg kan ikke se hvorfor Trump skulle være uenig med militæret.

De har gjort som kongressen har bedt dem om og undersøgt omfanget af de skader som vind og vejr laver på deres baser.

At lave sådan en undersøgelse og hvis omfanget er stort tage skridt som kan mindske skaderne fremover må vel falde i kategorien "rettidig omhu".

#1 Jeg synes nu at USAs militær er opmærksomme på at vejret netop er blevet værre og har brug for flere tiltag end de har taget for at beskytte deres installationer imod det, men også hvilken indflydelse det kan have på politisk stabilitet:
https://climateandsecurity.org/tag/u-s-military/

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/half-us-mil...

Altså jeg tvivler på at de Amerikanske militær baser altid har været i så stor fare fra klimaet. Så har de jo været bygget forkert fra starten...

kblood (2) skrev:

Jeg synes nu at USAs militær er opmærksomme på at vejret netop er blevet værre og har brug for flere tiltag end de har taget for at beskytte deres installationer imod det,

Jeg kan ikke finde noget sted i rapporten hvor der står at vejret er blevet dårligere. Kan du?

kblood (2) skrev:

Altså jeg tvivler på at de Amerikanske militær baser altid har været i så stor fare fra klimaet. Så har de jo været bygget forkert fra starten...

Ja.

Og det bringer dig i opposition til Trump. Ligesom The Guardian og millioner af andre.

Men det bringer ikke det amerikanske militær i opposition til Trump.

#3 Jeg synes ikke det du skriver giver mening. Kan heller ikke se hvordan det du kommentere bringer mig i opposition imod Trump... det er jeg da, men syntes ikke lige den sætning alene siger det.

Om militæret er imod om bare fordi de flere gange har påpeget at vejret bringer militærbaser og politisk stabilitet i fare ved jeg nu ikke. Som jeg ser det betyder det da bare at de rent faktisk forholder sig til virkeligheden. At det så også betyder Trump tager fejl... det må jo så være Trump der må beslutte hvad han vil gøre med den rapport. At man modsiger noget som han har taget fejl omkring gør da ikke at man er opposition.