Jump to content

US dumps huge amounts of sand on Miami Beach to tackle Climate Change erosion


Recommended Posts

Dozens of trucks have started dumping hundreds of thousands of tons of sand on Miami Beach as part of US government measures to protect Florida’s tourist destinations against the effects of climate change.

 

“We have erosion hotspots,” said Stephen Leatherman, an expert on beaches and the environment at Florida International University.

 

“When the beach is critically narrow, there’s not enough room for recreation for all the people that come here, and more important, perhaps, all these buildings need to be protected,” he said Friday.

 

 

Leatherman — known locally as “Dr Beach” — said that rising sea levels, triggered by climate change, are causing the accelerated erosion of the famous beach, as well as coastal storms and in particular hurricanes.

 

 

The Army Corps of Engineers this month began the $16 million operation to dump 233,000 cubic meters (8.2 million cubic feet) of sand on eroded areas of Miami Beach by June, a project that was originally designed to address damage wrought by Hurricane Irma in 2017.

 

Every day, trucks will tip between 100 and 250 loads, each containing 22 tons of sand, onto the beach, the Army said in a statement.

 

“Some people say it’s like throwing millions of dollars out in the ocean every year and maybe they’re right, but we have to do it; we have to have the beach here,” said Leatherman.

 

“South Florida is considered ground zero for climate change,” he said. “I mean, not only do we have beach erosion, we got flooding going on during King tides, which happen all too often now, where some roads get flooded.”

 

A King tide is an especially high spring tide.

 

The project is part of an overall $158 million federally funded plan to protect Miami from hurricanes and control beach erosion.

 

Adding-Sand-to-Miami-Beach-AFP.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Australia’s Bushfires Show the Wicked, Self-Destructive Idiocy of Climate Denialism Must Stop

Australia’s fires this summer—unprecedented in the scale of their destruction—are the ferocious but inevitable reality of global warming. A hotter, drier climate means more and longer droughts and more and fiercer fires.

So if Australia is on the front line of the climate crisis, why are we not also a world leader in climate action?

In most countries, asking people whether they believe in the science of climate change is like asking them whether they believe in gravity. It is a simple matter of physics. The more greenhouse gases are in the atmosphere, the hotter our climate will become.

 

But in Australia, as in the U.S., this issue has been hijacked by a toxic, climate-denying alliance of right-wing politics and media (much of it owned by Rupert Murdoch), as well as vested business interests, especially in the coal industry.

As Prime Minister, I tried to ensure that our climate and energy policies were governed by engineering and economics, not ideology and idiocy. Tragically, the climate-denying political right in Australia has turned what should be a practical question of how to respond to a real physical threat into a matter of values or belief.

 

Even as the fires rage, Murdoch’s News Corp. newspapers and television networks have been busy arguing that arsonists or a lack of controlled burning are the real causes of the fires. This has been refuted point-blank by the chief of the fire service in New South Wales, but the misinformation campaign continues in both mainstream and social media.

Climate-change denial has also infected our politics. Australia is currently governed by a center-right coalition of the Liberal Party and the National Party. I led the coalition twice—first as opposition leader from 2008 to 2009 and then as Prime Minister from 2015 to 2018. Both times, my efforts to take concerted action on climate change were followed by my losing my job.

 

In 2018, my government introduced a National Energy Guarantee (NEG), which combined emission reductions with reliability standards as a means of ensuring a smooth transition to a lower-emissions electricity sector while maintaining reliability of supply. It was supported by business and unions as well as state governments on both sides of politics. A majority of coalition legislators also backed it, but a right-wing minority, supported by their allies in the media, sabotaged the bill and then brought down my government.

Story continues
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Trump on Saturday laid out his plan for New Yorkers to use “mops and buckets” to deal with rising sea levels from climate change.

 

In the president’s mind, simply cleaning up after devastating floods is a superior option than stopping climate change or building a seal wall to protect New York.

 

“A massive 200 Billion Dollar Sea Wall, built around New York to protect it from rare storms, is a costly, foolish & environmentally unfriendly idea that, when needed, probably won’t work anyway. It will also look terrible,” Trump claimed. “Sorry, you’ll just have to get your mops & buckets ready!”

 

Internet commentatators wondered about the commander-in-chief’s grasp of the scale of the crisis.

 

 

kUuht00m_normal.jpg

A massive 200 Billion Dollar Sea Wall, built around New York to protect it from rare storms, is a costly, foolish & environmentally unfriendly idea that, when needed, probably won’t work anyway. It will also look terrible. Sorry, you’ll just have to get your mops & buckets ready!

 

#BREAKING Man Who Doesn't Understand How Toilets Work Doesn't Understand How Climate Change Works

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, benson13 said:

don't worry, Obama will sell it to some GW denying republiKlan in 10-15 years as water is creeping up

 

AND MAKE A HUGE PROFIT!

Why would anyone buy a house that will sink into the ocean?

 

Obama would have to disclose any issues with the property that he is aware of before he could sell it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, personreal said:

Why would anyone buy a house that will sink into the ocean?

 

Obama would have to disclose any issues with the property that he is aware of before he could sell it.

 

 

Makes no sense.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, benson13 said:

don't worry, Obama will sell it to some GW denying republiKlan in 10-15 years as water is creeping up

 

AND MAKE A HUGE PROFIT!

 

 

 

Why would anyone buy that house if water is creeping up?

 

do you even realize how stupid you are on this forum?   No wonder you’re such a coward 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...