Pragmatism your way out of this

Guess what the latest research on the impact of climate change says.  You will never guess, I am sure.  Go ahead, though, take a second and just throw something out there. Did you say, it's worse than previously thought?  Okay but that seems like a long shot. How could it be any worse? 

Alright alright, yes, it is worse.

Rising seas could affect three times more people by 2050 than previously thought, according to new research, threatening to all but erase some of the world’s great coastal cities. 

The authors of a paper published Tuesday developed a more accurate way of calculating land elevation based on satellite readings, a standard way of estimating the effects of sea level rise over large areas, and found that the previous numbers were far too optimistic. The new research shows that some 150 million people are now living on land that will be below the high-tide line by midcentury.

Yikes! And take a look at the graphics that accompany that story. The maps predict that  Mumbai, Bangkok, Shanghai, several other huge world cities could be submerged in a mere 30 years from now. They didn't publish an infographic map of New Orleans here but I am pretty sure we would hate to see it.

The article does mention us, though. Because, despite the fact that hundreds of millions of people all over the globe are at risk, we are still the world's poster children for this problem.  Kind of makes you almost proud a little bit.  Is proud the word?  

The new data shows that 110 million people already live in places that are below the high tide line, which Mr. Strauss attributes to protective measures like seawalls and other barriers. Cities must invest vastly greater sums in such defenses, Mr. Strauss said, and they must do it quickly.

But even if that investment happens, defensive measures can go only so far. Mr. Strauss offered the example of New Orleans, a city below sea level that was devastated in 2005 when its extensive levees and other protections failed during Hurricane Katrina. “How deep a bowl do we want to live in”? he asked.

So we're either going to have to seriously bulk up our coastal defenses, or start planning to move everybody out of harm's way as safely and equitably as possible. Either way that's going to cost a lot of money.

Who is going to shoulder those costs?  It should probably be the people who have spent the past 150 years or so putting us in this situation in the first place, right?  Not so fast, says the Times-Picayune-Advocate-Georges! This is from their endorsement of John Bel Edwards. They liked his "pragmatism" but disagreed about some things.

Such pragmatism is what Louisiana needs. There are, after all, many problems to solve, and we haven’t always agreed with the governor’s approach to the state’s underlying challenges. Louisiana needs a governor who supports tort reform and will stand up to trial lawyers and teacher unions. Lawsuits against energy companies put our state at a disadvantage when it comes to attracting investment.

No time to mitigate that apocalypse. Not when there's "investment" to attract.