Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: DMaA who wrote (227076)	11/6/2007 2:07:47 PM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (2) of 793840

She has a good reason to be upset. Many of those low-lying Alaska villages are being progressively undermined by coastal erosion. The problem is that two distinct issues are being conflated for political purposes: coastal erosion and global warming. These villages would be in serious danger even without global warming because they exist on highly dynamic, low-lying coasts. For centuries these people moved around as needed to cope with varying conditions. It's only within the last 150 years that they've settled down and built highly permanent villages with expensive infrastructure. It's not so easy to move anymore. They now need hundreds of millions of dollars to move entire villages further inland to higher ground. Houses, schools, churches, clinics, community centers, airstrips, fuel tanks, communications facilities... all must be moved miles away through difficult terrain. They are looking for very large grants of state and federal money to move those villages. Otherwise they'll have to give up and move to Bethel, Kotzebue, Nome, Fairbanks, or Anchorage. They are getting desperate.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next